Bridge Design

ADVANCING OF REINFORCE CONCRETE BRIDGE DESIGN IN
AFGHANISTAN
A DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

Requirements for the award of the degree
of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING
(With Specialization in structural engineering)
By
[Ahmad Jawid Jahanmal ]
Roll No. 130136002
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
GREATER NOIDA – 201 306 (INDIA)
May, 2015
2
i
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work that is presented in this dissertation

entitled “ADVANSING OF REINFORCE CONCRETE BRIDGE DESINGN IN
AFGHANISTAN” towards partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award
of the degree of Master of Technology in Civil Engineeringwith
specialization in “structural Engineering”, submitted to department of civil
engineering, School of Engineering and Technology, Greater Naiad, in an
authentic record of my own work carried out from August 201 4 to May 2015,
under the guidance of Mr.Nishant Kumar Rajoria [professor], Department
of civil engineering, School of Engineering and Technology, Sharda
University.
The matter embodied in this dissertation has not been submitted for the
award of any other degree.
Date:
Place: Greater Noida [Ahmad Jawid Jahanmal ]
RollNo.130136002
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is true to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Mr. Nishant Kumar Rajouria

[professor]
Department ofCivil Engineering.
School of Engineering and Technology
Sharda University, Greater Noida
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am highly thankful to Nishant Kumar Rajouria who is my guide and always guided me
to make my dissertation part-1.I am fruitful to Sir for being with me when I need help for
my research work and completed my work from start to end. I am also grateful to my
classmates my friends and special thanks to my closed friends who helps me more when I
want some guidance.
A very special thanks to our HOD Satya Prakash, administraton of SHARDA

UNIVERSITY and Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development and Ministry of
Public who Works helps me to collect data from Afganistan for this work
Ahmad Jawed Jahanmal

(Roll No. 130136002)
ii
ABSTRACT
This chapter presents advancement reinforce concrete bridges in Afghanistan the aim of
this chapter is how we can make a bridge which will have economy durability, and
consistency property. For this case I have to study old design as well as the current used
in Afghanistan so For collection of data I gone to Afghanistan two ministry one ministry
of public word and other ministry of rural rehabilitation and development. I bring Manual
which they used for reinforce concrete bridges, designing these manual used AASHTO
specification for reinforce concrete bridges after that I will study new methods and thin I
will compare both method which method have good durability, economy and consistency
after that I will Suggest some new method like pre stress girder and box girder for long
span bridges, than I will collect hold data for the using software after that I will get result
iii
TABLE OF CONCTENTS
Contents
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION ...................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iii
table of conctents ................................................................................................................ iv
list of figure ........................................................................................................................vii
list of table........................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1 ........................................................................................................................ 1
introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 General ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Research Scope .......................................................................................................... 8
1.4OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................. 8
1.5 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 10
1.6 CONTENT OF DISSERTATION ........................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 2 ...................................................................................................................... 13
LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................. 13
2.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Advancing the seismic design of reinforced concrete bridge columns .................... 13
2.3 Advanced Bridge Analysis and Design Methods Simplified .................................. 14
2.4 CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES USING INCREMENTAL LAUNCHIN ........... 14
2.5 Development of Preliminary Load and Resistance Factor Design of Drilled Shafts
in Iowa ........................................................................................................................... 15
2.6 Field Survey and Seismic Resilience ....................................................................... 17
2.7 Brown Bridge Study of the Imputation Methods for the Public Libraries Survey .. 17
2.8 Structural analysis and design of concrete bridges .................................................. 18
CHAPTER 3 ...................................................................................................................... 19
EXPIREMENTAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 19
3.1 General types of bridge design codes ...................................................................... 19
3.2 Calculation of Loads ................................................................................................ 19
iv
3.3 Distribution of wheel load on slab .......................................................................... 21
3.4 Distribution of Reinforce ......................................................................................... 22
3.5 Numerical analysis of reinforce concrete bridge by AASTHO method .................. 23
Example: 3.1 .................................................................................................................. 23
Example3.2 .................................................................................................................... 32
Example 3.3 ................................................................................................................... 36
3.6 Design and Analysis of Reinforce Concrete Bridge By IRC Code ........................ 43
3.7 General procedure for design of superstructure of a bridge by IRC code ............... 44
3.7 Transverse Distribution of Loads ............................................................................ 45
Example of T-beam bridge ............................................................................................ 45
CHAPTER4 ....................................................................................................................... 63
comparison ....................................................................................................................... 63
4.1General ...................................................................................................................... 63
4.2 General Steps of Comparison ................................................................................. 64
4.3 Calculation of loading and moment of girder ......................................................... 69
CHAPTER5 ....................................................................................................................... 75
modeling............................................................................................................................ 75
4.1 Modeling of Girder .................................................................................................. 75
5.2 maximum bending moment by IRC method ............................................................ 78
5.3 Maximum shear force by IRC method .................................................................... 79
5.4 Maximum Deflection by IRC method .................................................................... 80
5.5 Maximum stress by IRC code ................................................................................. 82
5.6 Design of girder by IRC code ................................................................................. 82
5.7 Maximum bending moment by ASSHTO method .................................................. 83
5.8 Maximum shear force by ASSHTO code ................................................................ 84
5.9Maximum deflection by AASHTO method .............................................................. 84
5.10 Modal Maximum stress by AASHTO method ..................................................... 86
CHAPTER6 ....................................................................................................................... 87
prestress I Beam with Composite Slab .............................................................................. 87
6.1 Ultimate Flexure ...................................................................................................... 87
6.2Ultimate FlexureDemands ........................................................................................ 89
6.3Ultimate FlexureResistance ...................................................................................... 93
6.4Ultimate FlexureSummary Tables ............................................................................ 97
v
6.5Ultimate Shear ........................................................................................................ 101
6.6 Ultimate ShearDemands ........................................................................................ 105
6.7 Ultimate Shear Resistance ..................................................................................... 110
6.7 Ultimate Shear Summary Tables ........................................................................... 115
6.8 Ultimate Flexure Demands for exterior girder ....................................................... 120
6.8 Ultimate Flexure Resistance for exterior girder ..................................................... 122
6.10 Ultimate Flexure Summary Tables for exterior girder ........................................ 125
6.11 Ultimate Shear Demands for exterior girder ........................................................ 128
6.12 Ultimate Shear Resistance for exterior girder ...................................................... 132
6.13 Ultimate Shear Summary Tables for exterior girder ............................................ 137
CHAPTER7 ..................................................................................................................... 143
conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 143
referenc ............................................................................................................................ 144
vi
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 1-Slab bridge ............................................................................................................ 2

Figure 2 - Main parts of the Slab Bridge ............................................................................. 2
Figure 3 - T-Beam Bridge .................................................................................................... 3
Figure 4- T-Beam Bridge ..................................................................................................... 3
Figure 5 - Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges ................................................................... 4
Figure 6 - Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges ................................................................... 5
Figure 7- Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges ......................................................... 5
Figure 8 - Arch Concrete Bridge ......................................................................................... 6
Figure 9- composite superstructure system.......................................................................... 7
Figure 10 -Standard HS-Truck........................................................................................... 20
Figure 11 -Standard HS-Truck........................................................................................... 20
Figure 12 - Standard H-Truck ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 13-Maximum bending Moment due to Dead load ................................................. 28
Figure 14-geometry of girder ............................................................................................. 30
Figure 15-testing girder due to shear force ........................................................................ 31
Figure 16-The reinforcement detail section ....................................................................... 36
Figure 17-longitudinal girders section dimension ............................................................. 37
Figure 18-longitudinal girder maximum live load moment ............................................... 40
Figure 19-Maximum live load for shear ............................................................................ 41
Figure 20-Maximum live load for shear ............................................................................ 42
Figure 21-Class AA tracked Wheel load position for Live loaf shear force ..................... 55
Figure 22-Load distribution on each girder ....................................................................... 60
Figure 23-Live Load on the span ....................................................................................... 61
Figure 24-Max love load cross girder ................................................................................ 61
Figure 25 -LL on the span .................................................................................................. 73
Figure 26-Max love load cross girder ................................................................................ 73
Figure 27-Model of Maximum Bending Moment Due To Moving Load ......................... 75
Figure 28 - Model of Displacement By IRC Method ........................................................ 76
Figure 29-Modal of Stress Due To Moving Load ............................................................. 76
Figure 30 -B.M .Due To Moving Load BY AASHTO Method ........................................ 77
vii
Figure 31-displacement due to moving load by AASHTO method .................................. 77
Figure 32 - model of stress by AASHTO method ............................................................. 78
Figure 33-model of girder by IRC code ............................................................................. 78
Figure 34-B.M diagram ..................................................................................................... 79
Figure 35 -shear diagram ................................................................................................... 80
Figure 36 -maximum deflection......................................................................................... 81
Figure 37 -maximum stress ................................................................................................ 82
Figure 38 -modal of girder ................................................................................................. 83
Figure 39 -B.M diagram .................................................................................................... 84
Figure 40 -shear diagram ................................................................................................... 84
Figure 41 -maximum deflection......................................................................................... 85
Figure 42 -maximum stress ................................................................................................ 86
Figure 43 -maximum moment diagram interior girder ...................................................... 89
Figure 45 -flexural capacity diagram ................................................................................. 93
Figure 47 -maximum moment diagram interior girder .................................................... 101
Figure 48 -maximum shear diagram interior girder ........................................................ 105
Figure 50 -shear capacity interior girder .......................................................................... 110
Figure 52-maximum shear diagram interior girder ......................................................... 119
Figure 53-flexural capacity left exterior girder ................................................................ 122
Figure 54 -3D modal ........................................................................................................ 142
viii
LIST OF TABLE
Table 1 -Mark Of Concrete ................................................................................................ 23

Table 2-Moment Of Cantilever Slab.................................................................................. 51
Table 3-B M Of Live Load ................................................................................................ 53
Table 4-Maximum binding moment by IRC method ........................................................ 79
Table 5-Maximum shear force ........................................................................................... 79
Table 6-Maximum deflection due to dead load and live load ........................................... 80
Table 7-maximum stress .................................................................................................... 82
Table 8-Maximum bending moment due to AASHTO code ............................................. 83
Table 9-Maximum shear force due to ASSHTO code ....................................................... 84
Table 5.7 Table 10-maximum deflection .......................................................................... 85
Table 11-maximum stress .................................................................................................. 86
Table 12-User Defined Combinations ............................................................................... 90
Table 6.2 Table 13-User Defined Combinations internal girder ....................................... 91
Table 14-Virtual Combinations internal girder.................................................................. 92
Table 15-Summary of Moment Demands.......................................................................... 92
Table 16-Section Cut Summary ......................................................................................... 97
Table 17-Section Cut Summary ......................................................................................... 98
Table 18-Section legend Summary ................................................................................... 99
Table 19-moment resistance Summary ............................................................................ 100
Table 20-User Defined Combinations: ............................................................................ 106
Table 21-User Defined Combinations: ............................................................................ 106
Table 22-for DF 0.857 ..................................................................................................... 107
Table 23-for DF 0.829 ..................................................................................................... 107
Table 24-for DF 0.859 ..................................................................................................... 108
Table 25-Summary of Demands Controlling Shear D/C ................................................. 108
Table 26-Section Cut Summary ....................................................................................... 115
Table 27-live load distribution Summary ........................................................................ 115
Table 28-demand ............................................................................................................. 116
Table 29-concrete resistance ............................................................................................ 117
Table 30-section resistance .............................................................................................. 118
ix
Table 31 -User Defined Combinations ............................................................................ 120
Table 32-Defined=0.691 Combinations........................................................................... 121
Table 33-Defined=0.857 .................................................................................................. 121
Table 34-Summary of Moment Demands........................................................................ 122
Table 36-PT and rebar ..................................................................................................... 126
Table 37-compression block ............................................................................................ 127
Table 38-moment resistance ............................................................................................ 128
Table 39-User Defined Combinations ............................................................................. 129
Table 40-User Defined 0.691 ........................................................................................... 129
Table 43-Summary of Demands Controlling Shear D/C ................................................. 131
Table 44-shear capacity ................................................................................................... 132
Table 46-live load distribution ......................................................................................... 138
Table 47-demands ............................................................................................................ 138
Table 48-concrete resistance ............................................................................................ 139
Table 49-section resistance .............................................................................................. 140
x
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Bridge, structure built over water or any obstacle or depression to allow the passage of
pedestrians or vehicles. Type of bridge for carrying a highway or railroad over a valley,
over low ground, or over a road. It is commonly constructed in the form of several towers
or piers that support arches on which the roadway rests. Viaducts are usually constructed
of steel or concrete; in the past they were built of wood or stone. Reinforced Concrete is
particularly well suited for use in bridges of all kinds Because of its durability, rigidity
and economy as well as the comparative ease with which a pleasing appearance can be
achieved.
Followings are some of the most common Concrete bridges:
Slab bridges
T- Beam Bridges
Precast Girder bridges.
Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges
Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges
Arch Concrete Bridge
Post-tension Pre stressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges (spans up to 300m).
Slab Bridges
A bridge with a superstructure that is composed of a slab that is either singular,
constructed in place, or a series of narrow, precast slabs. (The material often used in early
times is stones and timber) Slab bridges have usually a span length of 10…20 meters and
it would be good to make the slab continuous over more than one support.
A short- bridge consisting span of a reinforced-concrete slab resting on abutments.
1
Figure 1-Slab bridge
Main parts of the slab bridge
Figure 2 - Main parts of the Slab Bridge
Types of slab bridges due to material
• Timber slab bridges
2
• Stone slab bridges
• Steel slab bridges
• Reinforcement concrete slab bridges
T-Beam Bridges
T-beam, used in construction, is a load-bearing structure of reinforced concrete, wood or
metal, with a t-shaped cross section. The top of the T-shaped cross section serves as a
flange or compression member in resisting compressive stresses. The web of the beam
below the compression flange serves to resist shear stress and to provide greater
separation for the coupled forces of bending. A beam and slab bridge or T- beam bridge is
constructed when the span is between 10 -25 m.
Figure 3 - T-Beam Bridge
Figure 4- T-Beam Bridge
3
Precast Girder bridges
Precast girders can be more effective and economical when the girder quantity is large
and derails are repeatable. Project engineers are encouraged to consider precast
prestressed concrete girder superstructures as an alternative during the planning phase.
Types of Precast Concrete Bridges Built
•Double Tee and Multi-stem (20 m)
•Inverted Tee (30 m)
•AASHTO Box (36 m)
•AASHTO I-Beam (45 m)
•New I-Beam shapes (65 m)
•Spliced New I-Beams (96 m)
Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges

Multi-girder bridges are one of the most common types of medium span composite
bridge. Multi-girder construction is used for single spans and for continuous multiple
spans, and it is particularly effective where construction depth is limited. This article
provides a description of the features of this type of bridge and introduces some of the
structural design considerations
Figure 5 - Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges
4
Figure 6 - Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges
Composite Pre stressed - Concrete Bridges

Prestressed concrete decks are commonly used for bridges with spans between 25m and
450m and provide economic, durable and aesthetic solutions in most situations where
bridges are needed. Concrete remains the most common material for bridge construction
around the world, and pre stressed concrete is frequently the material of choice.
Extensively illustrated throughout, this invaluable book brings together all aspects of
designing pre stressed concrete bridge decks into one comprehensive volume.
Figure 7- Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges
5
Arch Concrete Bridge
The advent of modern concrete technology fostered a renaissance of arch bridge

construction in the United States. Stone arch bridges constitute an important chapter in
American bridge building, but by the second half of the nineteenth century the labor-
intensive nature of masonry arch bridge construction contrasted unfavorably with the ease
of metal truss erection. Reinforced concrete allowed the arch bridge to be constructed
with much more ease than ever before and maintained the load-bearing capabilities of the
form. Accompanying the return of the arch form were the traditional architectural
decorative details that had been in abeyance during the heyday of the truss bridge. It is
interesting that the renaissance of the arch bridge and its decorative elements coincides
with the reintroduction of the beaux arts aesthetics following the 1893 Columbian
Exposition
Figure 8 - Arch Concrete Bridge
6
Post-tension Pre stressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges
Precast concrete adjacent-box-girder bridges are the most prevalent box-girder system
for short- and medium-span bridges (which typically span from 20 ft to 127 ft [6.1 m
to38.7 m]), especially on secondary roadways. These bridges consist of multiple precast
concrete box girders that are butted against each other to form the bridge deck and
superstructure.
Figure 9- composite superstructure system
1.2 Background
In ancient times and among primitive peoples a log was thrown across a stream, or two
vines or woven fibrous ropes (the upper for a handhold and the lower for a foot walk)
were thrown across, to serve as a bridge. Later, arched structures of stone or brick were
7
used; traces of these, built from 4000 to 2000 B.C., have been found in the E
Mediterranean region. The Romans built long, arched spans, many of which are still
standing. Bridges built during the Middle Ages usually rested on crude stone arches with
heavy piers (intermediate supports) that were a great obstruction to river traffic, and their
roadways were often lined with small shops.
The best known early American design is the New England covered bridge, since wood
was abundant and cheap, and did not demand trained masons. Colonial American bridge
builders were willing to run the risk of rot or fire in exchange for such savings in time and
manpower. Beginning with Abraham Darby's bridge at Coalbrookdale in 1779, most
bridges began to be built of cast and wrought iron. Robert Stephenson, an English
engineer, designed and built a bridge of this type across Menai Strait in North Wales
(1850). Another is Victoria Bridge across the St. Lawrence at Montreal. The disadvantage
of cast iron for bridges is its low tensile strength
1.3 Research Scope
The aim of my research scope is using if new method by new codes for making advance
reinforce concrete bridges The aim of the study was to investigate and compare old
method and new method in analysis of bridge structures. This has been done in order to
investigate and illuminate actual differences between modeling procedures and how
choices made in a modeling stage impact the resulting design of reinforcement in a
reinforced concrete road bridge.
1.4OBJECTIVES
The first objective of my study is to investigate old data which was used for reinforce
concrete bridges in Afghanistan.
The second objective of my study is to investigate new reinforce concrete bridge which
used by latest code and used generally by new methods.
The third Objective of my study is to investigate and compare current methods in design
of bridge structures. This has been done in order to investigate and illuminate actual
differences between old & new method procedures and how choices made in a modelling
stage impact the resulting design of reinforcement in a RCC Bridge.
8
The fourth objective of my study comparing the data and enter the whole data in the
software and find out the result.
Across the country, thousands of bridges have reached the end of their useful lifespan and
are in need of replacement. Many of these structures support a significant volume of
commercial vehicles, creating vital economic links across the nation. Often, lengthy
closures for bridge replacement using traditional methods can mean forcing drivers to
detour many miles out of their way, which in turn can cause over-burdening of lower
volume roadways, creating congestion, using more fuel, and increasing user delay costs.
During construction of the new bridge superstructure, the old bridge remains open to
traffic. Importantly, this method makes it possible for the old bridge to remain open either
while needed repairs to the substructure are performed or while a new substructure is
built. Upon completion of the new bridge superstructure, the old bridge is closed to traffic
and demolished or removed. The new bridge superstructure is then pushed or pulled into
place on the new or modified bridge substructure. Following any necessary completion
work on the bridge approaches, the road is reopened to traffic. Often, this method is used
in concert with prefabricated bridge elements, which can further reduce the onsite
construction time.
Cracks in concrete do not always jeopardize the safety of a structure. Cracks may be the
cause or effect of a fault or both. The possible effect of crack must be considered in the
context of cause, location, environment and utilization of the structure. Consideration
may have to be given to the fact that cracks influence the stiffness and dynamic response
of a structure. Unforeseen cracks in reinforced concrete bridges may entail a risk of
fatigue failure. Construction and maintenance of diversion bridges for the required period
quantified in months shall be paid as per contract price on lump sum basis. Alternatively,
if specified in the contract, construction of the diversion bridges shall be paid as per
contract unit rates of respective items and maintenance work shall be paid as per days
work provided in the Bill of Quantities.
After collecting the whole data we will enter the whole data in the software and find out
the result about the old and new technique for the Bridge construction.
9
1.5 Methodology
In order to investigate the resulting differences between old methods and new methods,
two case studies was performed; one including an integral slab frame bridge and one
including a 3-span double beam bridge. The bridges are designed according to the
different models and current praxis. Sectional forces and the resulting designs are
compared in order to illustrate the impact different choices in a modeling stage have on
resulting design.
The established methods are chosen on basis of AASHTO and IRC codes and articles
concerning maximum bending moment maximum shear force stress and deflection and
design of concrete structures and bridges are studied. The survey focuses on current
modelling procedures and covers some possible choices in a design stage. Also used
software for STAAD Pro analyses of both methods for comparing of these methods
which can find difference between both methods
After these comparison I desire new type of bridge which used for long span and have
good strength and economical. so this type of bridge is pre stress concrete bridge for that
method I used AASHTO LRFD (2000) code by using CSI Bridge software which is one
best software for analysis and design of superstructure bridge.
1.6 CONTENT OF DISSERTATION
The following are the various content of my desertation
CHAPTER 1. Introduction. Bridge, structure built over water or any obstacle or

depression to allow the passage of pedestrians or vehicles. Type of bridge for carrying a
highway or railroad over a valley, over low ground, or over a road. It is commonly
constructed in the form of several towers or piers that support arches on which the
roadway rests. some of the most common Concrete bridges:
Slab bridges,T- Beam Bridges,Precast Girder bridges..Composite Steel - Concrete

Bridges, Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges, Arch Concrete Bridge, Post-tension
Pre stressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges
CHAPTER 2. Literature review. This was done with the purpose of gaining a betrer
understanding on the advantages and disadvantages and disadvantages of providing RC
bridges and other related issues .A literature review was also done on lateral live load
distribution factors in RC bridges effect in design of old and new method of RC bridges.
10
In this chapter the research work concerning to the various applications and methods used
for old and new methods . This chapter gives a comprehensive review of the work carried
out by various researches papers as following
CHAPTER 3. Experimental analysis. General IRC, ACI ,and ASSHTO is commune used
in the many country of the words and we also used ASSHTO method .The specification
contains provisions governing loads and load distribution as well as detailed provisions
relating to design and construction. The specification prefers to use the service load
method for the design of bridges.
CHAPTER 4. Comparison: This chapter presents comparison of reinforce concrete

bridges in Afghanistan the aim of this comparison is how we can make a bridge which
will have economy durability, and consistency property. For this case I have to compare
old and new method design as well as the current used in Afghanistan. I bring Manual
which they used for reinforce concrete bridges, designing. These manual used AASHTO
specification for reinforce concrete bridges
CHAPTER 5. Modeling: I have design a bridge design by IRC and AASHTO method to
gave whole report about design of bridge is coming lots of pages. So I consider only one
girder element which is value of these element is approximant same which I did in
numerical part bridge girder elements with thicknesses defined according to Table were
used to model the geometry of the bridge, see Figure The varying thickness of the girder
was defined according to an analytical expression using the “Analytical field” tool in
STAAD Pro The element size was chosen to 21m length depth of girder is 1.6m breadth
is 0.6 by in the remaining parts of the bridge this girder is design base of IRC and
AASHTO code
CHAPTER 6. prestress I- beam with composite slab: To capture the distribution of

various types of loads into the individual girders the program generates virtual
combination for each combination present in the design request. First the program splits
all Load Cases present in the combination into two groups -nonmoving and moving -
depending on their Design Load Types. In next step it multiplies the user defined scale
factor of Load Cases contained within the non-moving group by 1/n (where n=4 is the
number of girders). Next it multiplies the user defined scale factor of Load Cases
contained within the moving group by the section cut values of the LLD factors (exterior
moment, exterior shear, interior moment and interior shear LLD factors).
11
CHAPTER 6 Conclusion: By comparing the rcc bridge with the IRC and AASHTO code
we get by doing the IRC that there is the less usage of steel, also the material usage is
less. By the IRC method we get the geometry of girder economical, also there is usage of
only 3 longitudinal girders but in AASHTO we had used 4 girders that was used in
Afghanistan.In the IRC method the bending moment and shear force is less as compared
to the AASHTO method. So on the conclusion part I gave general information about my
thesis report the more information is in the conclusion chapter.
12
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL
In order to contextualize the current work, related works from literature is discussed .in
addition a thorough review of literatures on various aspects old and new method of RC
bridge and other factors that is load distribution shear and reaction distribution effect in
the bridge is presented. This was done with the purpose of gaining a betrer understanding
on the advantages and disadvantages and disadvantages of providing RC bridges and
other related issues .A literature review was also done on lateral live load distribution
factors in RC bridges effect in design of old and new method of RC bridges.
In this chapter the research work concerning to the various applications and methods used
for old and new methods . This chapter gives a comprehensive review of the work carried
out by various researches papers as following.
2.2 Advancing the seismic design of reinforced concrete bridge columns
(Sritharan, 2008)[ 17 ]. To better understand the behavior of materials and their impact on
the seismic design of reinforced concrete bridge columns, a series of controlled material
tests were performed at warm temperatures and cold temperatures expected to occur in
regions of seasonal freezing throughout the United States and the world. This temperature
range was between 20°C (68°F) and -30°C (-22°F) as this is common in high seismic
regions including but not limited to Alaska, the central United States, northern California,
China, and Japan. This is an Important aspect to understand as approximately 50% of the
bridges in high seismic regions can be affected by freezing temperatures
(Priestley, 2000)[13]The damage throughout many structures indicated that the

fundamental concepts of structures being designed to remain elastic under loading must
be modified to ensure an adequate behavior. To attain the desired response, researchers
began to focus on ways to increase the ductility of a system to prevent collapse. Out of
13
this came the capacity design philosophy which focused on carefully selecting plastic
hinge regions while ensuring no collapse under design-level and greater earthquakes
Earthquakes because of the lack of adequately defining the seismic forces applied to a
system and the handling of stiffness for any given structure. Instead of focusing purely on
the improvement of force predictions, research began to focus on the idea of reaching a
target displacement without failure. This led to the development of the direct
displacement-based design (DDBD) methodology, where researchers began to target drift
and or displacements that a given structure should reach for a specific target hazard. The
determination of an appropriate level of damping and ductility can then be used to
determine an effective period for the structural member. This effective period can then be
used to compute the effective stiffness of a member, which can then be related to a base
shear force and distributed throughout to complete the design process. This method takes
into account the fact that strength and stiffness are related to better improve the design
process to prevent collapse under a design level or greater earthquakes.
2.3 Advanced Bridge Analysis and Design Methods Simplified
The above three examples of recent software developments illustrate methods of

simplifying bridge analysis and design. The advantages are summarized as follows:
1• Automated Loading by the Influence Surface Method. This fully automates the
production of the worst case set of load patterns to AS5100 and NZ Transit Manual and
offers large savings in time and accuracy.
2•Composite Analysis Method. This technique changes the way engineers can apply 3D
frame and finite element models by resolving complex out of plane load effects to
produce single bending moments and shears that can be used for design.
3• Integrated Analysis and Design. This offers large design savings as the design/analysis
cycle time is significantly reduced.
2.4 CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES USING INCREMENTAL LAUNCHIN
(LaViolette, July 2006.)[11] It is estimated that over 1,000 bridges worldwide have been
constructed by the incrementallaunching method the vast majority of which have been
post-tensioned concretebox girder bridges. Their main application has been in Europe, but
14
the method has now spreadaround the world and the technology has been applied to steel
I-girder and box girder bridges aswell.In the early 1960s, the “modern” approach to
launching concrete bridges was developed. Thefirst concrete bridge constructed by
launching was built over the River Caroni in Venezuela andwas completed in 1963
(Durkee, Press, 2000.))[6]. the bridge was a post-tensioned concretebox girder bridge with
a main span of 315 ft. The construction of this bridge was considered sosuccessful that
the launching method was utilized to construct a nearly identical bridge a fewyears later
.(Bergeron, May 2002.)[4] Perhaps some of the best known examples of bridges
constructed by incremental launching are the Bailey Bridges, which were used by Allied
military forces during World War II. The Bailey bridge system consists of three main
components (truss panels, transoms or floor beams, and stringers). Each unit, when
assembled, creates a single, 10-foot-long section of bridge with a 12-foot-wide roadway.
After each such unit is complete, it is typically launched forward over rollers on the
abutment and another section is built behind it. The two are then connected with pins
pounded into holes in the corners of the panels. Additional load capacity can be
developed by adding truss panels outboard of the first, stacked vertically, and sometimes
both. The components are light enough to be assembled by infantry troops and launched
by pushing with a truck or tracked vehicle.
2.5 Development of Preliminary Load and Resistance Factor Design of Drilled

Shafts in Iowa
(Wotherspoon, (2010))[20] rock has higher stiffness and compressive strength. In this
report geomaterials, such as shale sandstone, limestone and mudstone, that have uniaxial
compressive strength (qu) greater than 100 ksf or SPT N60 value larger than 100 are
identified as rock. Unit side resistance for drilled shafts in rock is evaluated based on the
measured uniaxial compressive strength (qu) of the rock typically determined from
laboratory unconfined compression tests on rock specimens at field moisture levels.
However, qu values should not exceed the 28-day compressive strength of the drilled
shaft concrete (fc). The unit side resistance given as Eq. (2-16) and adopted in the
AASHTO (2010) is based on the recommendation suggested by Horvath
(Reese, (1975).)[14]The maximum qp of 60 ksf specified is based on the largest value

obtained from the load tests. For drilled shafts in cohesionless soil with N60 larger than
15
50, load testing is recommended to determine the qp; otherwise the maximum limit of 60
ksf shall be used. If the base geomaterials with N60 larger than 50 are treated as
cohesionless IGM instead of cohesionless soil as recommended in AASHTO (2010),
Section 2.4.4 of this report should be used to estimate qp
(Suleiman, (2006))[17] . Drilled shafts in the State of Colorado are designed based on
empirical methods that solely rely on measured SPT blow counts. However, these
empirical methods were developed several decades ago and geared toward the ASD
procedures, in which the margin of safety and expected shaft settlement are unknown. For
instance, the allowable unit end bearing of a drilled shaft in kips per square foot using the
Denver Magic Formula (DMF) is assumed to be equal to 0.5N, with an inherent factor of
safety of 2.0 to 2.5 while the allowable unit side resistance is recommended as 10% of the
allowable unit end bearing (i.e., 0.05N).Despite several deficiencies that have been
highlighted on the use of this design method, it has gained popularity among Colorado
design communities due to its simplicity and conservatism. In order to continue using this
simple design method and satisfy the LRFD framework and possibly identify alternative
efficient design methods, O-cell load tests have been conducted on drilled shafts installed
in Colorado to correlate and enhance the SPT-based design method and to provide the
necessary data for future development of LRFD resistance factors that reflect Colorado’s
soil and rock conditions. Seven of the load test results have been compiled in the
DSHAFT database and are designated as IDs 33 to 39. After assessing the load test
results, the ultimate axial capacity of the drilled shafts were determined based on specific
site conditions, and a common failure criterion, such as 5% of shaft diameter for
displacement as recommended in AASHTO (2010), was not implemented in defining the
ultimate capacities. Having no locally calibrated LRFD resistance factors, CDOT adopts
the AASHTO (2010) recommended resistance factors in design and increases the design
efficiency by performing field load tests. CDOT has been encouraged by Abu-Hejleh et
al. to perform comprehensive subsurface investigations and field load tests on test shafts
that are identical to the production shafts. For drilled shafts in very hard rock, the 28-day
concrete compressive strength of 4 ksi or higher upon approval should be used.
Alternatively, the AASHTO (2010)
16
2.6 Field Survey and Seismic Resilience
(Gobarah, (1988).)[9] Some bridges had poor quality-control during construction that
resulted in low-strength concrete while many bridges are deteriorating and thus more
vulnerable to seismic activity. Nearly 50% of 575,600 bridges in USA were found to be
structurally deficient of unction ally obsolete which highlights the fact of ailing
infrastructure The publication of “AASHTO Standard” (AASHTO, 2002) has been
discontinued after its 17th edition. The current applicable standard is the 4th edition of
AASHTO-LRFD (AASHTO, 2007)[1]. In addition, a more focused document (AASHTO,
2009) for seismic design with improved displacement-based design (AASHTO, 2009)
was approved as an alternate to the seismic provisions of the current AASHTO-LRFD
Specifications. These significant improvements in the design specifications need to be
utilized for a study of the bridges designed with older specifications.
(Friedland, 2006 Through 2009) In USA, the first edition of the AASHTO Standard then
known as AASHO was published in 1931. From the first to the fourth edition of this
standard until 1945, seismic loading was not a part of the specification. For the first time
in 1949, the fifth edition of AASHTO Standard mentioned the earthquake stresses to be
included but no guidelines were given. Also, in the sixth and seventh editions of
AASHTO Standard in 1953 and 1957, no guidelines for seismic design were included.
The eighth edition in 1961 specified earthquake load for the first time. The next three
editions in 1965, 1969 and 1971 which were the ninth, tenth and eleventh editions,
respectively, had the same seismic provisions of 1961, without any change. The
provisions of 1961 specification were 2% to 6% of the total load to be applied as lateral
load depending upon the type of foundation
(Fujikura, (2000)) In Kobe earthquake, three major new long-span steel bridges suffered
damage which was not anticipated. These bridges were designed using state-of-the-art
seismic standards specifically developed for each project .Wilson outlined three
characteristics for a resilient system namely, it reduces the chances of a shock; it absorbs
a shock if it occurs; and it recovers quickly. He pointed out that these aspects were
lacking in these three bridges. He also stated that the time taken to restore the bridges
after the Kobe earthquake was three to nine months
2.7 Brown Bridge Study of the Imputation Methods for the Public Libraries
Survey
17
(Bracci, (1992))[5]: In 2009, a study to evaluate the way the imputation cells were defined
and to evaluate current and new imputation methods was completed. This bridge study
shows the magnitude of change in the national and state estimates due to the new
imputation methods that were implemented in the FY 2008 PLS. This study will only
show how different the estimates are, not which methods are better. Results of research
comparing the different imputation methods can be found in
2.8 Structural analysis and design of concrete bridges

(Rombach, (2004):)[15] The critical cross sections for design depend on the expected
modes of failure. For a cast connection, such as a frame corner or monolithic column, the
critical crack for bending failure will form along the column or wall surface, Sustainable
Bridges(2007)[5]; hence this is where reinforcement can be expected to yield first. When
designing a structure according to a linear elastic moment distribution, it is therefore
sufficient to design for the moment at the column or wall face. The critical shear crack for
such cast connections can be assumed to have an inclination less than 45 degrees. The
equal
critical section for shear will therefore be situated at a distance to the internal lever-
arm from the face of the column or wall, Sustainable Bridges (2007), or approximated to
the thickness of the member, The shear force inside of that section will be carried to the
column/wall and not be critical for shear failure. Rombach (2004)[15]
18
CHAPTER 3
EXPIREMENTAL ANALYSIS
3.1 General types of bridge design codes
1- BS 5400 – united kingdom
2- Ontario Highway Bridge design code (OHBDC)
3- IRC (Indian Rout Congress)
4- ASSHTO American code .
5 – ACI (Amirecan concrete Institute)
IRC, ACI ,and ASSHTO is commune used in the many country of the words and we also
used ASSHTO method .The specification contains provisions governing loads and load
distribution as well as detailed provisions relating to design and construction. The
specification prefers to use the service load method for the design of bridges.
3.2 Calculation of Loads
Followings are some of most important loads applied considered in the design of bridges.
 Dead loads”The dead load on a superstructure is the weight of all superstructure

elements Such as deck, Wearing coat, railing, parapet, stiffeners and etc.
 Live load truck loading :The live load of the AASHTO specification Consists of
standard, idealized trucks Or of live Loads which are equivalent to a series of
trucks. Two systems of loading are provided The H–loading and the HS-loading,
as shown The H- loading represents a two-axle truck the HS-loading represents a
two-axle tractor plus a single axel semi trailer.
19
Figure 10 -Standard HS-Truck
The number of loading indicates the gross weight in tons of the truck or tractor. The gross
weight is divided between the front and rear axles
Figure 11 -Standard HS-Truck
Figure 12 - Standard H-Truck
Selecting of loads
The AASHTO specifications provides that bridges supporting interstate highways shall be
designed for HS20-44 loading or an alternate military loading of two axles for other
20
highways which may carry heavy truck traffic the minimum live load shall be HS15-44
.In the design of bridges supporting local highways H20-44 Loadings, one axle load of
106KN. may be used instead of the axle of 142KN.
Application of loading
Followings are some of more important rules for applying the selected AASHTO loading:
The lane loading or standard truck loading shall be assumed to occupy a width of 3 m.
these loads shall be placed in 3.6 m width design traffic lanes spaced across the entire
bridge road way width in numbers and positions required to produce the maximum stress
road way. Width from 6 to 7.3 m shall have two design lanes, each equal to one-half the
roadway width.
Each 3 m lane loading or single standard truck shall be considered as a unit, and
fractional Load-lane widths or fractional tucks shall not be used.In slab design the
centerline of the wheel shall be assumed to be 30 cm from the face of the curb while for
beam design it is considered to be 60cm.
Impact load: Live load stresses due to truck are increased to allow for vibration and
sudden application of the Load. The increase is calculated by the formula.
I = 50/ 3.28L+125< 30%
Where I is the impact factor and L is the length of bridge. The max impact factor to be
used shall be 30 percent.
3.3 Distribution of wheel load on slab
The pertinent rules for the distribution of wheel loads on concrete slabs and some
additional design requirements are as follows
Effective Span length: the span length shall be the distance center to center of Supports
but shall not exceed clear span plus thickness of slab. The following effective span
lengths shall be used in calculating the distribution of loads and bending moments for
slabs continuous over more than two supports
( Slabs monolithic with beam)
S = clear span=effective span
S = distance between edges of flanges plus one-half the stringer flange width.
Edge distance of wheel load from curb
21
In designing slabs, the centreline of the wheel load shall be assumed to be 30 cm from
the face of the curb.
Bending moment:The bending moment per meter width of slab shall be calculated as
Bellow:
Method 1 main reinforcement perpendicular to traffic: The live load moment for simple
spans shall be determined by the following formula
HS20 loading
1.64( S  1)
M max  H 20 = Moment, kg-m per meter width of slab, where H20= 7.2ton 20
16
HS15 loading:
1.64( S  1)
M max  H 15 =Moment, kg-m per meter width of slab, where H15= 5.34ton
16
For slab continuous over three or more supports a continuity factor of 0.8 should be
considered.
Method 2 Main reinforcement parallel to traffic: In this case the live load moment is
obtained by solving the statically system of The slab in the critical loading condition The
load per meter width of the slab is determined by distributing the wheel load over a width
of
E = 1.22 + 0.06S ≤2.1m, while the lane load is distributed over a width of 2E
3.4 Distribution of Reinforce
Distribution reinforcement shall be in the bottom and top of all slabs transverse to the
main Reinforcement to provide for lateral distribution of the concentrated live loads the
amount is Percentage of main reinforcement given by the following formulas:
For main reinforcement parallel to traffic:
0.55
ρ = percentage of distribution reinforcement = % Maximum 50%
s
For main reinforcement perpendicular to traffic: Asd =P.As Maximum 67%
Es
Following table shows the Modular ratio n  for different type of concrete
Eb
Table 2.1Modular ration for different type of concrete
22
MARK OF CONCRETE MODEL RESCUE
210 TO 275 10
280 TO 345 8
>350 6
Table 1 -Mark Of Concrete
3.5 Numerical analysis of reinforce concrete bridge by AASTHO method
Example: 3.1
Design reinforce concrete bridge by the given data length (L=21m ) Width (B=7,5m) slab
Thickness(d=20cm) fc = 200Kg/cm2 and fs =1400kg/cm2 ᵧc =2400kg/m3 Sidewalk width
F=50cm
1- Thickness of asphalt 6cm
2 – Insulation of water or waterproof 2cm
3- Protection layer or insulation covers 2 cm
4- Thickness of reinforce concrete slab 20 cm
Equation 1- thickness of slab
Solution
Finding the clear span
The finding of Clear span of slab are following
7.5
Leff   1 .9 m
4
Calculation of loading
The first part of bridge design is calculation of loading know first is finding of dead load
23
Dead load:
Dead load due to weight of slab = 0.2 •2400 •1m=480kg/m2
Dead load due to weight of road thickness
Dead load due to weight of asphalt=0.2•1800•480kg/m2
Dead load due to weight of insulation cover=0.02•2400•1m=48kg/m2
Dead load due to weight of insulation =0.02•1000•1m=20kg/m2
 Loads=480+108+20+48=656Kg /m2
Maximum bending Moment due to Dead load
W  L2 656  1.9 2
M max    296.02kg  m
8 8
Live load Axial load: for Hs20 two axial heavy Vehicles(track) which have 32000lb
weight is equal to 14515kg in the MKS system iscentralize.
Maximum bending Moment due to Live load
1.64( S  1) 1.64(1.9  1)
M max  H 20  0.8 14515.2  2987.3kg  m
16 16
On the tope function ( 0.8 ) value for continues beam and 1.64 is constant.
Maximum bending Moment due to impact loadThe max impact factor to be used shall be
30% percent of Maximum bending Moment due to Live load
Mimpa= 0.3Mmax =0.3  2987.3=896.2Kg.M
0.3 is Coefficient of impact load which find from following function
4.5 4.5
Fimp    0.33  0.3
L  6 7.5  6
Know find summation of moment
𝐷𝐿 𝐿𝐿 𝑖𝑚𝑝
∑ 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 = 296.02 + 2987.3 + 4179.52𝐾𝑔 ∙ 𝑀
Second Stapes Slab Thickness
For the finding of the slab thickness we used this formula
2 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥
M max =R bd2 ⇒ 𝑑 = √ ,
𝑅.𝑏
24
For checking of the slab thickness we consider following factor. These factors belong to
culverts. The more information References to the culverts chapter .
K=0,404 is constant for every mark of concrete

𝑘 0.404
𝐽=1− = 1− = 0.865 ≅ 0.87
3 3
𝑓𝑐, 200 70𝑘𝑔
𝑓𝑐 = = =
3 3 𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑐 70
𝑅= ∙𝐽∙𝐾 = ∙ 0.87 ∙ 0.404 = 12.3
2 2
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑅 ∙ 𝑏𝑑 2
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 4179,52 ∙ 100

𝑑=√ =√ = 18.4𝑐𝑚
𝑅∙𝑏 12,3 ∙ 100
If the cover of the slab is 4cm and reduces of steel bar is 1cm and also the steel bar of slab
is 20mm so we can to find the thickness of slab by the following equation
D=d+a+1com=18.4+4+1=23.4≅25cm
d=D-a=25-4=21cm
Third Step Finding of the quantity of steel bar
By the following equation, can find the quantity of steel bar on the slab
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 4179.52 ∙ 100
𝐴𝑠 = = = 16,34𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑐 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑 1400 ∙ 0.87 ∙ 21
By the using of norm diameter of steel bar 16mm consider. area of one steel bar is equal
to
𝜋 ∙ 𝑑2 3.14 ∙ 1, 62
𝐴1𝑠 = = = 2.0096𝑐𝑚2
4 4
Number of steel bars
𝐴𝑠 16,14
𝑁𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑠 = 1
= = 8.13 ≅ 8
𝐴𝑠 2.0096
8Φ16mm@12.5cmC/C(As =16.34cm2 )
The weight of steel bar in one meter if

𝑑 16
𝐺 = 0.222( )2 = 0.222( )2 = 1.57𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
6 6
25
By the following equation can find longitudinal steel bar for slab
120 120
𝐴𝑠 = > 67% ⟹ = 138
√𝑠 √1,9
As=0.67 ∙16.34= 10.94cm2
6Φ16mm@16.5cmC/C
Step Fourth Calculation of interior girder
Leff =L+1m=21+1m=22m
The Dimension of girder can find by following equations

1 1 1
ℎ = ( ÷ ) ∙ 𝐿 ⟹ ( ) ∙ 22 = 1.2𝑚
12 18 18
1 1 1
𝑏 = ( ÷ ) ∙ ℎ ⇒ ( ) ∙ 1.2 = 0.50𝑚
2 3 2,5
Figure 3.2 section of interior girder
Calculation of loading and moment of girder
1.Calculation of dead load
Dead load due to weight of slab
𝐷𝑠 = 1.9 ∙ 0.25 ∙ 2400 = 1140𝐾𝑔 /𝑚
Dead load from girder
26
𝐷𝑔 = 0.5 ∙ 1.2 ∙ 2400 = 1440𝐾𝑔 /𝑚
Dead load due to weight of road thickness
Dead load due to weight of asphalt
0.06 ∙ 1800 ∙ 1.9𝑚 = 205.2𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
Dead load due to weight of insulation
0.02 ∙ 1000 ∙ 1.9𝑚 = 38𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
Dead load due to weight of insulation cover
0.02 ∙ 2400 ∙ 1.9𝑚 = 91.2𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
∑ 𝐷𝐿𝑜𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 205.2 + 38 + 91.2 = 334.4𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
∑ 𝐷𝐿 = 1140 + 1440 + 334.4 = 2941.41𝑘𝑔 /𝑚
Maximum bending moment due to dead load

𝑤 ∙ L2 29114.4 ∙ 222
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = = 176321.1𝑘𝑔 ∙ 𝑚
8 8
Live load for girder. For every girder fine the live load first of all for a girder find
effective loads
S=0.95×2 =1.9m
Distribution load factor

𝑆 1.9
𝑓= = = 0.96
1.98 1.98
Rear wheel load
14515.2×0.96 =13934.6Kg /m
front wheel load
8000Lbs×0.95 = 3628.8Kg×0,95 =1723.68Kg /m
Now for both wheel of trick effect it that point of bridge which gave maximum bending
moment in this case if we considered wheel of trick on culvert by following form it gave
the maximum bending moment again
27
Figure 13-Maximum bending Moment due to Dead load
For the finding of RA reaction is consider the moment at point B
RA= 22- 3628, 8× 6, 02 -14515, 2 ×10, 27-14515, 2 ×14, 52

381677,18
𝑅𝐴 = = 17348.96𝑘𝑔
22
For finding the maximum value, consider the moment at point (O) then gave imaginary
cross-section after that consider the right side of the beam
M max =17348.96×11.73−14515.2×(2.79 + 0.73) =141813.7K g∙ M
Maximum moment due to impact: the coefficient of impact load for girder find by the
following equation
15 15
𝐼= = = 0,25
𝐿 + 38 22 + 38
Maximum moment due to impact =0.25⋅141813.7=35453.425K g ⋅M
M max =35453.425+176321.2+141813.7=353588.32K g ⋅M
For the section of girder consider T section of girder and used 40m or 38mm
Geometer of girder
dbars dslab
ho = h − dbars − acovr − dsp − − = 120 − 4 − 7 − 5 − 2 − 10 = 92cm
2 2
bbars diameter of first Row of steel bar
acovr cover of steel bar
dsp spacing of first and second row of steel bar
Finding of the quantity of steel bar
28
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 353588,32 ∙ 100
𝐴𝑠 = = = 274.5𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑠 ∙ ℎ0 1400 ∙ 92
𝜋 ∙ 𝑑 2 3,14 ∙ 42
𝐴1𝑠 = = = 12.56𝑐𝑚2
4 4
𝐴𝑠 274,5𝑐𝑚2
𝑁= 1= = 21.8 ≅ 22𝑛𝑜𝑠
𝐴𝑠 12,56𝑐𝑚2
22∅40𝑚𝑚
Checking of girder section

𝑐 𝑓
If 𝑀𝑐 = 2𝑏𝑡 (𝑑 − 𝑜. 5ℎ𝑓) < 𝑀
Then tension steel bar can find by bellow formula

𝑀
𝐴𝑠 = (𝑑 − 0.5ℎ𝑓)
𝑓𝑠
On the T girder some cases occur which M>Mc on that case compression steel bar is also
necessary for the finding of compression steel bar used bellow formula
𝐴𝑠
𝑃=
𝑏∙𝑑
Whenever (𝐾 ∙ 𝑑 > 𝑡)on that case continues to calculation ,but if whenever (𝐾 ∙ 𝑑 < 𝑡) on
that case consider the rectangle coruscation form for calculation, so we can find tension
steel bar from this formula
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐴𝑠 =
𝐹𝑠 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑0
The value of K can find by this formula

𝑛 𝑚 ∙ 𝐹𝑐 𝑛 12.3 ∙ 70
𝐾= = = = = 0.38𝑑
𝑑 𝑚 ∙ 𝑓𝑐 +𝑓𝑠 93 12.3 ∙ 70 + 1400
𝑛 = 𝐾 ∙ 𝑑 = 34.96𝑐𝑚 > 25𝑐𝑚
29
Figure 14-geometry of girder
T girder have two cases, first case is( 𝐾 ∙ 𝑑 > 𝑡 ) and second case is
𝑘
𝑓𝑐 = 𝑓𝑠 [ (1 − 𝐾)] < 0.5𝑓𝑐
𝑛
So the girder is work like T coruscation girder, and girder section is rectangular the
geometer of girder is will be (60 × 140)
Dead load due to girder
Dead load due to weight of road thickness = 176K g /m
Dead load due to weight of slab
0.25∙1.9∙2400 =1140K g /m
Dead load due to weight of girder
0.6∙1.4∙2400 = 2016K g /m
ΣDL=176 + 2016 +1140 = 3332K g /m
q ∙ L2 3332 ∙ 222
Mmax = = = 201586k g ∙ m
8 8
Impact load and live load
ΣM max Live L+ImpactL=141813.7+35453.425=176867.13K g∙M
ΣM max = 176867.13+201586=378853.125K g∙M
dbars dslab
ho = h − dbars − acovr − dsp − − =
2 2
30
240 − 4 − 7 − 5 − 2 − 12,5 = 108,5cm
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 378853.125 × 100
𝐴𝑠 = = = 278,62cm2
𝐹𝑠 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑0 1400 0.87 108.5
𝜋 ∙ 𝑑 2 3,14 ∙ 42
𝐴1𝑠 = = = 12.56𝑐𝑚2
4 4
𝐴𝑠 274,5𝑐𝑚2
𝑁= = = 21.8 ≅ 22𝑛𝑜𝑠
𝐴1𝑠 12.56𝑐𝑚2
22∅40𝑚𝑚
Checking of section Dimension
M max =R bd
M max 378853.125  100

d   223cm
Rb 12.3  60
As we know damnation of girder is so large for this case for making caution economical
so we have to rise the mark of concrete from 200 to 300 (M300>M200) on that case the
Coefficient of moment resistance is equal to
𝑓𝑐, 300
𝑓𝑐 = = = 100𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
3 3
𝑓𝑐 100
𝑅= ∙𝐽∙𝐾 = ∙ 0.87 ∙ 0.404 = 17.57𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
2 2
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 378853.125 ∙ 100

𝑑=√ =√ = 180𝑐𝑚
𝑅∙𝑏 17.57 ∙ 60
The damnation of girder is (60× 180)
Testing of girder due to shear force

On this condition we conceder the truck load at point A which can see on the form
Figure 15-testing girder due to shear force
31
𝑅𝐴 ∙ 22 − 24515.2 ∙ 22 − 14515.2 ∙ 17,75 − 3628.2 ∙ 13.5 ⇒
319334.4 + 257644.8 + 48980.7
𝑅𝐴 = = 28452𝑘𝑔
22
Total shear force = Live Load + Impact Load + Dead Load
Impact Load = 0.25×28452.7 = 7113.17K g
Live Load = 28452, 7K g
w L 3332.22
Dead load  R A  Rb    3665kg
8 22
ΣDL = 28452.7 + 7113.17 + 3665 = 72217.875K g
Q 72217.875
𝐹𝑠 = = = 6.68𝑘𝑔
𝑏∙𝑑 60 ∙ 180
Virtual Resistance of concrete
𝑅 = 0.25 ∙ √𝑀 = 0.25 ∙ √300 = 17.3𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
𝑅 17.3
𝑓𝑠 = = = 8.65𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
𝑆 2
On the top equation S is safety factor which is equal to two (S=2)as we know
6.68k g /cm2<8.65k g /cm2
so the strength of girder is inife for vertical forces or can say stirrups and concrete can
resist these loads.
Example3.2
By given data design the reinforce concrete slab bridge Clear span = 5m,Clear
width=7.3m,Live Loading = HS20,Wearing Surface = 8mm bitumen, Concrete Strength
Fc′=250K g /cm2,F y =4000K g /cm2
According to AASHTO specification the allowable concrete stress
F = 0.4∙F′= 0.4∙250 =100kg / cm2
Allowable steel stress
fy 4000
fs    2000kg / cm 2
2 2
32
Solution
The thickness of slab for deflection control can be considered as following
L/16 = 500/16 = 31.25 cm take h =35cm
The effective span is S = clear span + thickness = 500+35=535cm
Calculation of loading
1- dead load. by following method, calculation of dead load is considered the weight of
slab and weight of cover of slab
Wt. of slab = 0.35∙2.5=0.875T/m2
Wt. of wearing coat =0.08 ∙2.2= 0,176 T/m2
Total D.L = q = 0.176+0.875 =1.051 T/m2
Moment due to dead load

q s 2 1,051 ∙ 5,352
mu = = = 3.76T. m
8 8
Live load: The load on each rear wheel is 7.1Tons and the effective distribution width is
bellow
E = 1.22 + 0.06S ≤ 2.1m
E = 1.22 + 0.06  5.35 = 1.541m
The load on a unit width of slab is
7.2
 4.672Ton
1.541
The live load moment is

p. s 4,672 ∙ 5,35
Mu = = = 6,25T ∙ M
4 4
The Impact Coefficient is
50 50
𝐼= = = 0,35 > 𝐼𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0,3
3,28 ∙ 𝑆 + 125 3,28 ∙ 𝑆 + 125
Take max I=Imax =0.3
Impact moment is
MI =I ×Mu= 0.3×6.25 =1.875T∙M
The total moment is
33
M Total = M DL +M LL +M IL = 3.76 + 6.25 +1,875 = 11,885T∙M
The neutral axis depth coefficient is

𝑓𝑠 2000
𝑟= = = 20
𝑓𝑐 100
𝑛 10
𝐾= = = 0,333 ⟹ 0,3
𝑛 + 𝑟 10 + 20
The internal resisting moment arm coefficient is
𝐾 0,3
𝐽 =1− = 1− = 0,87
3 3
The resisting moment capacity is:
𝑓𝑐 𝑓𝑐
𝑀= ∙ 𝑏 ∙ 𝑘 ∙ 𝑑 ∙ 𝑗 ∙ 𝑑 = ∙ 𝑏 ∙ 𝐾 ∙ 𝑗 ∙ 𝑑2
2 2
Know we the checked for minimum permissible effective depth of slab which difference
between elementary thickness and new thickness
The minimum permissible effective depth of slab is
2M 2 ∙ 11,885 ∙ 102
d=√ = √ = 28,7cm
fc ∙ b ∙ k ∙ J 100 ∙ 100 ∙ 0,3 ∙ 0,87
Assuming 5 cm clear cover plus
bd 20
  10mm  1cm overall depth is
2 2
h = 28,7 +1+ 5 = 34,7cm ⇒ hence h = 35cm is - ok d = 35 - 5 -1 = 29cm
Magnitude of steel bar can find by bellow formula
The main reinforcement is
M 11.885  10 2
As    23.6cm 2
f c  j  d 2000  0.87  29
Using 25mm bars A = 4,9cm spacing is

100 ∙ 4,9
𝑆= = 20,7𝑐𝑚 ⇒ 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒 20𝑐𝑚
23,6
Use φ 25mm@20cm C /C as main reinforcement
0,55 0,55
𝑃= = = 0,237 = 0,24 ⇒ 𝐴𝑠𝑑 = 𝑃 ∙ 𝐴𝑠 = 0,24 ∙ 23,6 = 5,6𝑐𝑚2
√𝑠 √5,35
34
𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔∅16𝑚𝑚𝐴∅ = 1,13𝑐𝑚2
𝑟𝑒quired spacing is
1,13 ∙ 100
S= = 20cm
5,61
Use 12mm@20cmC /C distribution reinforcement
Curb design. The curb is assumed to be 60cm by 60cm, hence the dead load carried by
edge beamis Self wt. of curb
0,6∙0,6∙1∙2,5=0,9T/m
q ∙ S 2 0,9 ∙ 5,352
𝑀𝐷𝐿 = = = 3,22𝑇. 𝑚
8 8
And the specified live load moment is
M u = 0,1∙H20∙S = 0,1∙7,2∙5,35 = 3,85T∙M
The total moment is
M Total = M DL +M u = 3,22 + 3,85=6,802T∙M
The resisting moment is

𝐹𝑐 100
𝑀= ∙ 𝑏 ∙ 𝐾 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑2 = ∙ 60 ∙ 0,3 ∙ 0,87 ∙ 502 = 21,532 ∙ 102 𝑘𝑔 ∙ 𝑚
2 2
This is greater than required moment Total
M = 6,802T∙M hence adequate.
𝑀 21,53 ∙ 102
𝐴𝑠 = = = 24,75𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑠 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑 2000 ∙ 0,87 ∙ 50
𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔∅25𝑚𝑚𝑏𝑎𝑟𝐴𝑠 = 4,9𝑐𝑚2
21,53
𝑁𝑜 , 𝑆 = = 4∅25𝑚𝑚
4,9
According to AASHTO Specification, Slabs designed for bending moment may be
consideredSatisfactory for shear, but let’s try it
Dead load shear is:

q ∙ S 0,9 ∙ 5,35
𝑉𝐷𝐿 = = = 2,41𝑇𝑜𝑛
2 2
Live load Shear is
35
1,1
𝑉𝑢 = 7,2 + 7.2 ∙ = 8,68𝑇𝑜𝑛
5,35
Impact Shear is
V1 = 0,3∙8,68 = 2,6Ton
Total Shear is
V DL +V u + V1 = 2,41+ 8,68 + 2,6 =13,69Ton
According to AASHTO specification the allowable shear stress is
𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 0,03 ∙ 𝑓𝑐, = 0,03 ∙ 200 = 6𝐾𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
Actual shear stress
v 13.69  108
V   5.43k g cm 2  6k g cm 2  safe
b  d  j 100  29  0.89
The reinforcement detail is shown bellow:
Figure 16-The reinforcement detail section
Example 3.3
Design a deck slab bridge according to AASHTO Specification for the following data:
Clear span = 6m Clear width = 7.3m,Wearing Surface = 8mm bitumen,Concrete Strength
36
Fc′=250K g /cm 2, Fy =4000K g /cm,Curb width = 60cm
Design of T-Beam Bridge
Clear span =15m,Clear width 7.3m,live loading HS20,Concrete Strength = 4000 kg/cm2
Grade of Concrete = 200 kg/cm2
Note: The design should meet the AASHTO specification.
Section dimension proportion
Take 5 longitudinal girders with the dimensions shown bellow
Depth of girder for deflection control
L 1600cm
  133cm
12 12
𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒ℎ = 1.2𝑚
Assume the slab thickness
t=20cm and web width Bw =50cm
Figure 17-longitudinal girders section dimension
Slab Design
Since the slab and girder are monolithic the span would be taken as clear distance
between girders,
S = 1.825 – 0.5 = 1.325m
Calculation of loading and moment which occur by loading
Calculation of dead load due to weight of slab and cover
37
Self wt. of slab = 0. 20∙2. 5 = 0.5T /m2
Wt. of wearing coat = 0. 082. 2 = 0.176T/m2
Total D.L = 0. 5+0.176=0.676 T /m2
Moment for
q  S 2 0.676  1.325 2
D.L   M DL    0.112T  m
10 10
According to AASHTO the live load moment for the slab with main reinforcement
Perpendicular to traffic is given by the following formula:
1,64 ∙ 𝑆 + 1 1,64 ∙ 1,325 + 1
𝑀𝑢 − 0,8 ( ) 𝐻20 = 0,8 ( ) 7,2 = 1,142𝑇 ∙ 𝑀
16 16
moment due to impact load
Impact factor is:

50 50
I= = = 0,38 > Imax = 0,3
3,28 ∙ S + 125 3,28 ∙ 1,325 + 125
Impact moment is
𝑀𝐼 = 𝐼 ∙ 𝑀𝑈 = 0,3 ∙ 1,142 = 0,343𝑇 ∙ 𝑀
Calculation of moments due to dead load live load and impact load
Total moment is
M Total= M DL +M LL +M IL= 3, 76 + 6, 2 5 +1,875 = 11,885T∙M
Allowable concrete stress is
𝐹𝑐 = 0,4 ∙ 𝑓𝑐, = 0,4 ∙ 250 = 100𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
Allowable Steel Stress is

𝑓𝑦 4000
𝑓𝑐 = = 2000𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
2 2
𝑓𝑠 2000
𝑟= = = 20
𝑓𝑐 100
𝑛 10
𝐾= = = 0,333 ⟹ 0,3
𝑛 + 𝑟 10 + 20
Minimum required depth of slab is:
38
2M 2 ∙ 1,607 ∙ 102
d=√ =√ = 10,58cm
fc ∙ b ∙ k ∙ J 100 ∙ 100 ∙ 0,3 ∙ 0,87
Assuming 5cm cover and 1cm half bar diameter, total depth is:
h = 10,58+5+1=16,58⇒ Take depth h =18cm
The remaining effective depth is
d = 18 − 5 −1 = 12cm
The main reinforcement
M 1,607 ∙ 105
As = = = 7,7cm2
fc ∙ J ∙ d 2000 ∙ 0,87 ∙ 12
Using ∅16mm with A = 2.01cm2

100 ∙ 1,13
𝑆= = 21𝑐𝑚𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑠 = 20𝑐𝑚
5,16
𝑢𝑠𝑒 12𝑚𝑚@20𝑐𝑚𝐶/𝐶
Design of interior girder: The interior girders are T beams with a flange width equal to
center-to-center distance of girder, The bearing width for girder is assumed to be 1m, and
the effective span length is
L= 15+1 =16m
Dead load moment
Wt. of slab per meter of girder
1.825 ∙0.18∙2.5 +1.825∙0.08∙2.2 = 1,142T /m
Self weight of girder per meter run
0.5∙1∙2.5 = 1.25T /m
Total D.L = W = 1.142+1.25=2.39T/m
𝑊 × 𝐿2 2,39 × 162
𝑀𝐷𝐼 = = = 76,5𝑇 ∙ 𝑀
8 8
Live Load Moment: the maximum live load moment on the longitudinal girder will occur
with An truck on the bridge in the position shown below:
39
Figure 18-longitudinal girder maximum live load moment
Girder share of wheel load

S 1.825
= = 0.997 ≅ 1
1.83 1.83
The load of rear tire on girder
=1.72 = 7.2Ton
The load of front tire on girder
Front tire on girder
1∙1.78 = 1.78Ton as shown above.
The max moment occurs at the point M,
∑ 𝑀𝑏 = 0
−𝑅𝐴 ∙ 17 + 7.2 ∙ 12.05 + 7.2 ∙ 7.8 + 1.78 = 0 ⇒ 𝑅𝐴 = 8.78𝑇𝑜𝑛
∑ 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 8.78 ∙ 9.2 − 7.2 ∙ 4.25 − 7.2 ∙ 0 = 50.17𝑇. 𝑀
The impact factor is calculated by

50 50
𝐼= = = 0,27
3.28 ∙ 𝐿 + 125 3.28 ∙ 17 + 125
M Imp = 0.27∙M Max = 0.27∙50.176=13,55T∙M
M Total= M Dl +M LL +M Imp = 76.5+50.176+13.55=140.22T∙M
40
Design Shear of girder
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝐷𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑉𝐿𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑉𝐼𝑀𝑃𝑀𝑎𝑥

𝑊 ∙ 𝐿 2,39 ∙ 16
𝑉𝐷𝑀𝑎𝑥 = = = 19,2𝑇
2 2
The maximum live load shear happens at the case shown bellow,
Figure 19-Maximum live load for shear
Girder share of wheel load
S 1.825
  0.997  1
1.83 1.83
The load of rear tire on girder
1∙7.2=7,2Ton
The load of front tire on girder
1∙1.78 =1.78Ton
∑ 𝑀𝑏 = 0
−𝑅𝐴 ∙ 17 + 7.2 ∙ 12.05 + 7.2 ∙ 7.8 + 1.78 = 0 ⇒ 𝑅𝐴 = 8.78𝑇𝑜𝑛
∑ 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 8.78 ∙ 9.2 − 7.2 ∙ 4.25 − 7.2 ∙ 0 = 50.17𝑇. 𝑀
The impact factor is calculated by:

50 50
𝐼= = = 0,27
3,28 ∙ 𝐿 + 125 3,28 ∙ 17 + 125
M Imp = 0.27∙M Max = 0.27∙50.176=13.55T∙M
M Ttal = M Dl +M LL +M Imp = 76.5+50.176+13.55=140.22T∙M
41
Design Shear of girder
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝐷𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑉𝐿𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑉𝐼𝑀𝑃𝑀𝑎𝑥

𝑊 ∙ 𝐿 2,39 ∙ 16
𝑉𝐷𝑀𝑎𝑥 = = = 19,2𝑇
2 2
The maximum live load shear happens at the case shown bellow:
Figure 20-Maximum live load for shear
∑ 𝑀𝑏 = 0
−𝑅𝐴 ∙ 16 + 7.2 ∙ 16 + 7.2 ∙ 11.75 + 1.78 ∙ 7.5 = 0 ⇒ 𝑅𝐴 = 13.32𝑇𝑜𝑛
The max Impact shear is: L V = 0.27 ∙13,32 = 3.6T
The total shear is: total V = 3.6 +13.32 +19.2 = 36.12T
According to AASHTO specification the allowable shear stress for concrete girders is
Vall=0.06∙ 𝑓𝑐, =0.06∙250 =15kg / cm2
The acual shear stress is given by

𝑉
𝑉= 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑣 = 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑙
𝑏∙𝑑∙𝐽
𝑉 36,12 ∙ 103
𝑏𝑑 = = = 2767,8𝑐𝑚2
𝑣∙𝑗 15 ∙ 0,87
𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔
2767,8
𝑏𝑤 = 40𝑐𝑚 ⇒= = 69,2𝑐𝑚
50
usingφ 25mm bars and 7cm clear cover and three layers of steel each 5cm apart total
depth is
h = 69,2 + 5 + 2,5 + 2,5∙0,5 + 7 = 84,95cm take overall depth h = 108cm
Actual effective depth
42
d = 98 - 5 - 7 - 2,5 - 2,5∙0,5 = 82,25cm
𝑀 140,226 ∙ 105
𝐴𝑠 𝑡
= 18
= 82,4𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑠 (𝑑 − 2) 2000 (92,25 − )
2
𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔∅ 25𝑚𝑚𝐴∅ = 4.9𝑐𝑚2
75.2
𝑁𝑜, 𝑠 = = 17.18 ≅ 18
4.9
𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑦𝑒𝑟𝑠 6∅ 25𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ
Design of web reinforcement
The concrete shear resistance is
Vc= 0.53√𝑓𝑐, = 0.53√250 ∙ 40 ∙ 92.25 = 30.92𝑡𝑜𝑛
Design shear is
vu 36.12
Vs   Vc   30.92  11.57Ton
 0.85
Minimum shear is
Vs = 3.5∙bw∙d = 3.5∙40∙92.25 = 12.915Ton
Using Φ8mm 4-legged stirrups Aφ = 4∙0.5cm2 =2cm
The spacing of web reinforcement is
Av  f  d 2  2000  92.25
S   28cm
vs 12.915
Use Φ8mm 4-legged stirrups at 25 cm C/C
The max spacing is calculated to be
d 92.25
S max    46cm
2 2
3.6 Design and Analysis of Reinforce Concrete Bridge By IRC Code
General:
General guidelines for analysis and design of a bridge struvture
Procedure for preparation of General Arrangement Drawing of a Bridge:
43
I. First of all the required formation level is found out. On knowing this the permissible
structural depth is established. This is done after taking into account the following two
things. (i)Minimum vertical clearance required taking into account thedifference between
the affluxes high flood level and the soffit of the deck.(ii) Thickness of wearing coat
required below the formation level.
II.Considering the depth of foundations, the height of deck above the bed level and
lowwater level, average depth of water during construction season, the type of
bridge,span lengths, type of foundations, cross section of the deck, method of
construction and loadinsequence.
III.Trial cross sections of the deck, sizes of various elements of the substructure and
superstructure are decided upon and drawn to arrive at the preliminary general
arrangement of the bridge. Various trials lead to a structural form with
optimum placements of its load masses. Relative proportions and sizes of certain
members as well as their shapes are decided upon and drawn to a certain scale on this
drawing. The type of bearing to be used along with their locations depending the support
system is also established. The main basis of the general arrangement drawing of a bridge
structure is a quick preliminary analysis and design of the member sections.This is
essential for forming the basis of the detailed to be carried later on depending upon the
requirements of the project
3.7 General procedure for design of superstructure of a bridge by IRC code
1.Analyze and design the transverse-deck-slab and its cantilever portions, unless the
superstructure is purely longitudinally reinforced solid slab with no
cantilevering portions. This is necessitated so as to decide the top flange thickness of the
deck section which is essential to work out the deck section properties for the subsequent
longitudinal design
2.Compute the dead load and live load bending moments at each critical section.
3.In order to determine the maximum and minimum live load effects that a
particular longitudinal can receive, carry out the transverse load distribution for live load
placed in various lanes.iv)This may be done by Courbon's method,Little and Morice's
method,Hendry and Jaegermethods’)Alternatively, use may be made to the Plane-Grid
method which involves using oneof the many standard computer programs (.e.g. STAAD
program). The Plan Gridmethod is basically a finite element method. Though time
44
consuming in writing theinput data, it is nevertheless very useful for the purpose of
analysis. For wide andmulti-cell boxes and transverse live load distribution may be studied by the
finite element method but it is time consuming.
4.Design against bending of critical sections, in reinforced or in prestressed concrete asthe
case may be.
5.Work out dead load and live load shear forces at each critical section in thelongitudinal
of the deck and design the sections and reinforcements for effects of torsion and shear, if
required.
3.7 Transverse Distribution of Loads
Analysis based on the elastic theory is recommended to find the distribution in the
transverse direction of the bending Moment in the direction movement in the direction of
the span. For the analysis, the structure May be idealized in one of the following ways:
i.a system of interconnected beams forming a rigid
ii.an orthotropic plate
iii.an assemblage of thin plate elements or thin plate elements and beams For the
computation of the bending Moment due to live load, the distribution of the live loads
between longitudinal has to be determined. When there are only two longitudinal girders,
the reactions on the longitudinal can be found by assuming supports of the deck slabas
unyielding. With three or more longitudinal girders, the load distribution is estimated
using any one of the above rational methods.
By using any one of the above Methods, the Maximum reactions factors for intermediate
and end longitudinal girders are obtained. The bending Moments and shears are then
computed for these critical values of reaction factors. The above three Methods make
simplifying assumptions relating to the structure and loading. These assumptions
introduce errors but Make these Methods amenable to calculators and graphs. In relative
comparison to this the grillage Method of analysis, pioneered by Lightfoot and Sawko
requires lesser simplifying assumptions
Example of T-beam bridge
Design the superstructure for one span for a T-beam bridge to be builet on a rural section
of a state Highway. The bridge consists of five spans of 21m assume moderate exposure
and cement concrete wearing course
45
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Clear roadway = 7.5m
Assume three T-beam spaced at 2.5m
Effective span of T-beam =21m
Assume 7 cross beams at 3.5m interval
The preliminary dimensions may be assumed (based on experience )as shown in.these
may be checked later and modified if necessary. M25 grade concrete and high yield
deformed on IS:1786 will be used. Clear cover to reinforcement is taken as 4mm
DECK SLAB
The slab is supported on four sides by beams.
Thickness of slab H=215 mm
Thickness of wearing course D = 10cm
Span in the transverse direction =2.5m
Effective span in transverse direction = 2.5-0.3 =2.2m
Span in the longitudinal direction 3.5 m
Effective span in the longitudinal direction =3.5-0.25=3.25 m
(i) maximum B.M. due to dead load
Weight of deck slab  0.215  24  5.16 kn M 2
Weight of the wearing course  0.1  22  2.2 KN m 2
Total weight  7.36 KN m 2
Since the slab is supported in all four sides and is continuous Pigeaud curves will be used
to get influence coefficients to compute moments
Ratio K =short span long span = 2.2 3.25  0.676
1 1
  1.477
k 0.676
From pigeads curves m1 = 0.047 and m2 =0.0175
Total dead weight = 7.36  2.2  3.25  52.624KN
Moment along the short span  0.047  0.15  0.017552.624  2.611KN  m
46
Moment along the long span  0.0175  0.15  0.04752.624  1.24kN  m
(ii) Live load B.M.due to IRC class AA tracked vehicle
Size of one panal of deck slab  2.5  3.5
One track of the tracked vehicle is placed symmetrically on the panel as shown in track
contact dimensions are taken
Impact factor fraction +25%
Width of load spread along short span
u 0.85  2  0.12  0.2152  1.0717m
Similarly width of load spread along longitudinal direction
v 3.6  2  0.12  0.2152  3.806m limiyed to 3.25
K=0.676
u 1.0717
  0.487
B 2.2
V 3.25
 1
L 3.25
Using pogeaud s curves
m1  7.9  10 2
m2  2.8  10 2
Total load per track including impact  1.25  350  437.5KN
3.25
Effective load on the span  437.5   373.587 KN
3.806
Moment along the shorter span  7.9  0.15  2.8  10 2  373.589  31.082KN.m
Moment along the longer span  (2.8  0.15  7.9)  10 2  373.589  14.887 KN.m
(iii) live load B.M. due to IRC class AA wheeled vehicle
The class AA wheeled vehicle should be placed on the deck slab panel as shown in Fig
4.4. for producing the severest moments. The front axle es placed along the centre line
with the 62.5 KN wheel at the centre of the panel only three wheels per axle total of six
wheels can be accommodated within the panel. the maximum moments at he centre in the
47
short span and long span directions are computed for individual wheel loads taken in the
order shown
(1) B.M. due to wheel 1
The dimensions of wheel 1 is 300× 150𝑚𝑚
u  (0.3  2  0.1) 2  0.215 2  0.544m
v  (0.15  2  0.1) 2  0.215  0.41m
Using pigeaud’s curves
u 0.544
  0.2472
B 2.2
v 0.41
  0.126 K=0,677
L 3.25
m1  19  10 2
m2  15  10 2
Total load allowing for 25% impact = 62.5 1.25  78.1KN
Moment along short span = (19  0.15  15)  10 2  78.1  16.596KN.m
Moment along the long span = (15  0.15  19)  10 2  78.1  13.94KN.m
(b) B.M.due to wheel 2
The wheel load is placed un symmetrically with respect to the YY axis of the panel. But
pigeaud’s curves have been derived for loads symmetrical about the centre hence we use
an approximate device to overcome the difficulty. we imagine the load to occupy an area
placed symmetrically on the panel and embracing the actual area of loading with intensity
of loading equal to that corresponding to the actual load. We determine the moment in the
two desired directions for this imaginary loading. Then we deduct the moment for a
symmetrical loaded area beyond the actual loaded area. Half of the resulting value is
taken as the moment due to the actual loading
(62.5  1.25)
Intensity of loading   41.42kN m2
0.544  0.375
Consider the loaded area of 2.2  0.375
For this area m1  8.3  10 2 m2  8.05  10 2
48
Moment along the short span
 (8.3  0.15  8.05)10 2  2.2  0.375  41.42  32.488KN.m
Moment long the long span (8.05  0.15  8.3)10 2  2.2  0.375  41.42  31.76KN.m
Next consider the area between the real and the dummy load ( 1.496m)(0.375m)
For this area m1  11.3  10 2 m2  10.35  10 2
Moment along the short span

 (11.3  0.15  10.35)10 21.496  0.375  41.42  27.89KN.m
Moment alont the long span

 (10.35  0.15  11.3)10 2  1.496  0.375  41.42  26.14 KN.m
1
Net B.M.along short span = (32.488  27.89)  2.29 KN.m
2
1
Net B.M.along along span  (31.76  26.14)  2.81KN.m
2
Similar procedure as for case (2) we gat
B.M. along short span =3.4KN.m
B.M.along the long span =4.15KN.m
(4) B.M.due to wheel 4
B.M. along the short span =3.86KN.m
B.M. along the long span =3.14KN.m
(5) B.M due to wheel 5
B.M.along long span =1.852KN.m
(6)B.M.due to wheel 6
B.M.along short span =1.799kN.m
B.M.along long span =1.566KN.m
(7) Total banding moment due to all wheels on the span
The total effect is computed as summation of individual effects
49
Total banding moment along short span
16.596  2.29  3.4  3.86  2.923  1.799  30.868KN.m

Total banding moment along long span
13.94  2.81  4.15  3.14  1.852  1.566  27.45KN.m

(2). Design of bending moment:
Class AA tracked vehicle causes heavier moment than wheeled vehicle along the short
span direction. But along the long span direction class AAwheeled vehicle gives the
severe effect. The loads causing maximum effects are adopted for design moments the
above computations assumed assumed a simply supported condition along the four edges
in fact the deck slab is continuous to allow for continuity the computed moments are
multiplied by a factor 0.8
Design B.M. along short span  (2.51  30.868)0.8  26.7 KN.m
Design B.M. slong long span =(1.24+27.45)0.8= 22.952KN.m
Finding of reinforcement
 cb  8.3MPa  st  200MPa j = 0.90 R = 1.10
26.7  1000  1000

Effective depth required =  155.797mm
1.10  1000
Effective depth provided assuming 12mm diameter main bars
= 215 – 40 – 6 = 169 mm
26.7  1000  1000

Area of main reinforcement =  877.71mm 2
200  0.90  169
Adopt 12 mm dia. Bars at 110mm centers. Giving an area of 1028mm2
22.952  1000  1000

Area of longitudinal reinforcement   812.17 mm 2
200  0.90  157
Adopt 12mm dia. Bars at 140mm centers gibing an area of 808mm2
CANTILEVER SLAB
(1) Moment due to dead load
The total maximum moment due to dead load per meter width of cantilever slab is
computed as in the following table
50
Table 2-Moment Of Cantilever Slab
Maximum Moment Of Dead Load For Cantilever Slab
S. No Description Load KN Lever arm moment

KN
1 handrail (approach) 1.74 1.40 2.44
2 kerb 0.475  0.275  24 3.14 1.34 4.19
3 wearing course
1.1 0.1 22 2.42 0.55 1
4 slab 1.575  0.1 24 3.78 0.79 2.99
0.5  0.25 1.572  24 4.72 0.52 2.45
Total 13.07
(2) Moment due to live load
Class AA loading will not operate on the cantilever slab. Class A loading is to be
considered and the load will be as shown
Effective width of dispersion be is computed by this equation
be  1.2  bw
X=.0.70
bw  0.25  2  0.1  0.45m
be  1.29m
Live load per m width including impact
57  1.5
 66.279 KN
1.29
Maximum moment due to live load
= 66.279  0.7  46.375KN.m
Finding reinforcement for cantilever slab
51
Total moment due to dead load and live load
 13.07  46.379  60.079
60.079  1000  1000

  233.7mm
Effective depth required 1.10  1000
Effective depth provided = 350 – 40 – 8 = 302
Area of the main reinforcement required
60.079  1000  1000

  1154mm 2
200  0.90  289
Adopt 16mm dia. Bar 220mm centres plus 12mmdia. Bar at 220mm centers giving a total
area of 1428mm2
B.M. for distributors
 0.2 13.07  0.3  46.375  16.526KN.m
16.526  1000  1000

Area of distributors  328.52mm 2
200  0.90  289
10mm dia. Bar at 220mm centers area of 3
LONGITUDINAL GIRDER
(1) Data
Effective span = 21m
Slab thickness = 215mm
Width of rib = 300mm
Spacing of main beams = 2500mm
Overall depth of beam = 1575mm
(2) B.M. due to dead load
Dead load per m run is estimated as below
Wearing course = 2.5  0.1 22  5.5KN
Deck slab  2.5  0.215  24  12.9KN.
T-rib  0.3 1.35  24  9.75KN

Fillets = 2  0.5  0.30  0.15  24  1.08KN
Cross beams total weight divided by total length
52
 7  2.2  1.05  0.25  24  4.41KN
22
Total dead load per m run is =33.64KN
33.64  21  21
Maximum banding moment  1854.4 KN.m
8
(3) Banding moment due to love load
Maximum live load banding moment would occur under class A two lane loading
Impact factor fraction
Live load banding moment by Courbon’s method
the conditions for the applicability of courbon’s are satisfied. Below equation is used for
determine the reaction factors
p = w/2 n = 3, e = 0.8m
it is assumed that the values of I for all the three girders are equal reaction factor for
girder A
Ra 
 P 1  n  e  x 
n   x 2
4w  sl 
Ra  1   2.5  0.7  1.89W
3  2(l  2.5 )
2

4W
Rb  (1  0)  1.33W
3
Rc  4W  (1.89  1.33)W  0.78W
Absolute B.M. occurs at under that heavier wheel load which is nearer to the C.G. of the
load system that can possibly be accommodated on the span of 21 M. The placement
should be such that the centre of span is mid-way between the wheel load and the C.G. of
the load system. This position is shown below.
X = 6.42M , C.G of Load = 6.42-(1.1+3.2+1.2) = 0.92M from fourth load
Table 3-B M Of Live Load
Load No Load value Ordinate Moment
53
W1 27KN 4.54 56.97KN.m
4.67  2.111m
10.04
W2 27KN 5.64 70.74KN.m

4.67  2.62
10.04
W3 114KN 8.84 469KN.m

4.67  4.111
10.04
W4 114KN 4.67 532.38KN.m
W5 68KN 5.74 165.92KN.m

4.67  2.44
10.96
W6 68KN 2.74 79.39KN.m

4.67  1.1675
10.96
Total 1374KN.m
Bending Moment, BM, including Impact Factor and Reaction factor for
Outer girder =1.167  0.945 1374  1515.26KN.m
Inner girder  1.167  0.67 1374  1074.3KNm
Live load shear force

Shear Force will be Maximum due to Class AA Tracked vehicle. For Maximum
shear force at the ends of the girder, the load will be placed between the support and the
first intermediate girder and shear force will be found by the reaction factors derived
below. For intermediate section, same reaction factors will be used as derived for bending
Moment.
Shear at the end of girder
Since the length of the track is 3.6M Maximum shear will occur when the C.G. of load
is1.8M away from support A of the girder. The load will be confined between the end and
thefirst stiffener. Along width of the bridge, the track will be so placed that it
maintainsmaximum clearance of 1.2M. Hence distance of C.G. of load from kerb
= 1.2+0.425 =1.625M
54
Figure 21-Class AA tracked Wheel load position for Live loaf shear force
1.675
p1  p  0.8 p
2.1
1.425 1.725
p2    1.03 p
2.1 2.1
0.375
p3  p  0.18 p
2.1
Reactions at end of each Longitudinal Girder due to transfer of these loads at 1.8M from
left support
RA  0.374 p RD  0.347 p
RB  0.535 p RE  0.495 p
Rc  0.093 p RF  0.087 p
the load RD , RE , RF should be transferred to the cross girders as per Courbon’s theory
W  0.374  0.495  0.087 p

W  0.929 p
W  22.6  2.6
2
55
RD 
 p 1  nex 

n   x 2 
0.929 p  3  0.5877  2.5 

RD  1  
3  2(2.1) 2 
RE 
 p 1  nex 

n   x 2 
0.929 p
RE  [1  0]
3
RE  0.31 p
These reaction RD and RE act as point loads in outer girder and inner girders at their 1/5
points of total span
RA  21  RD 14.968 RB  21  RE 14.968
RA  0.8RD RB  0.8RE
R A  0.8  0.464 P RB  0.8  0.31P
RA  0.712P RB  0.248
Hence shear at A  RA ' RA  0.3712P  0.3712P
B  RB ' RB  0.535P  0.248P but p=350KN

Hence shear force at outer girder  1.10  0.7452  350  284KMN
Hence shear force at inner girder 1.10  0.783  350  302KN
Design of maximum banding moment
Live load bending moment obtained from Courvon’s method will be adopted.
Design B.M.=moment due to D.L+moment due to L.L.
1854.4+1515.26=3369.66KN.m
Design of section
Effective flange width for the T-beam section will be determined as per clause 305.15.2
0f IRC Bridge Code.
Effective flange width = thickness of web +0.2 (0.7) (effective span )
0.3  0.14  21  3.24m
56
For beams M25 concrete will be used and the outer girder will be designed as T-beam
having a depth of rib = 1.725m
Total depth = 1.725+0.225 = 1.95m
Lte us assume an effective depth +1.725 - 0.120=1.605m
M max 3369.66  10 6
Ast    11663.75mm 2
 st  j  d 200  0.9  (1605)
Provide 12 bars of 32mm diameter having total Ast = 9651mm2 and
Provide 4 bars of 25 mm diameter having total Ast =1964mm2
Arrange these bars in 4 layers with spacing between bars ecual to largest diameter bar
used 32mm
Clear cover = 40mm
Height of C.G of bars from bottom of bars = (40  12  32  2)  148mm
d=1625 – 148= 1577mm<1605mm hence ok
Check for stresses
1 depth of neutral axis; flange width will be the least of the following
a. 12bs  br  12  225  400  3100mm
b. c c spacing  2500mm
c. span 3  21 3  7mm
Hence flange width  B  2500mm
2. let depth of neutral axis be N lying in web
 d 
B  d s   n  s   m  Ast (d  n)
 2
2500  225(n  112.5)  10  11.467(1577  n)
n=361mm
d 1577
critical neutral axis depth n    526mm
 st 200
1 1
m   cbc 10  10
57
Actual neutral axis falls above the critical neutral axis therefore the stress in the steel
reaches the maximum value first hence  st  200 N mm

2
Corresponding stress in the concrete at the outer fiber is given by
 st n 200 361
c     5.94 N mm 2
m (d  n) 10 (1577  361)
Similarly
n  Df
c1  c
n
361  225
c1   5.94  0.38 N mm 2
361
c  2c1  D f  5.94  2  0.38  225 

y       79.51mm
c  c1  3  5.94  0.38  3 
Lever arm a =d – y = 1577 – 79.51 =1497.49mm
Mr   st  Ast  a
Mr  200 11467 1497049
Mr  3434.34KN  M  3313KN  M
Area of steel required
3017  10 6
Area of steel required=  10.443
200  11467  1497.49
No. of 32mm diameter bars = 10443/305 = 12.9  13
Check for local bond stress as per IRC code
Assume effective depth = 1950 – 60 = 1890mm
605  10 3
recuired 
0.9  1890
355.67
NO.of 32mm bars 
3.142  32
Hence at least 4 bars are to be taken straight
Check for shear
58
605  10 3
1 nominal shear stress at support  0.8K N mm 2 ,hence shear
400  1890
reinforcement is necessary.
173  10 3
2. nominal shear stress at support   0.25K N mm 2 hence shear
400  1700
reinforcement is not necessary
313  10 3
Nominal shear stress at support   0.46 K N mm 2 , hence provide shear
400  1700
reinforcement approximate distance from support ar which shear stress is 0.5N/mm2
1 2 (9.455  7)  8.23m
Let us bend up 2 bars at a time at a spacing of 0.707 0.707  0.9 1605  1021.26mm
Bend 2 bars at a time spacing = 1020mm
If 5 bars are bent up by 4bent bars of 32mm  4  805  200  sin( 45)  455KN
Net remaining shear at support for which shear reinforcement has to be provided
= 605 – 450= 150KN
2  78.5  200  2100

Spacing S v   439.6mm
150  10 3
Hence provide 10mm diameter at 180mm c/c at support up to 4.08m. after 4.08m only 2
bars will be effective.
455  10 3
At quarter span remaining shear = 410  10  3
 182.5KN
2
2  78.5  200  1700

Spacing of two legged stirrups 10mm diameter   292.49mm
182.5  10 3
Hence provide 2L-10mm diameter bars at 200mm c/c from 4.08m to 5.1m
Beyond 5.1m no bent up bars are available. Therefore shear at 3/8 span
3
 21  7.875  313KN
8
2  78.5  200  1700

Therefore spacing of 10mm diameter bars 2L=  170.54mm
313  10 3
Therefore provide 2L 10MM diameter bars at 150MM c/c
From 7.02M to 8.02M Provide 2L 10MM diameter at 180MM c/c
59
For remaining distance provide 22L 10MM diameter at 300MM c/c
Summary
Provide 10MM 2L diameter at 180MM c/c from support upto 4.08MProvide 10MM 2L
diameter at 200MM c/c from 4.08M to 5.1MProvide 10MM 2L diameter at 180MM c/c
from 5.1M to 7.02MProvide 10MM 2L diameter at 180MM c/c from 7.02M to
8.02MProvide 10MM 2L diameter at 180MM c/c for remaining length
Design of cross girder
Figure 22-Load distribution on each girder
Dead load
Cross girder are placed at 3.742M c/c
Dimension = 31275
Weight of rib = 0.3 1.275m  24  9.18KN / m
Dead weight from slab and wearing coat  7.36 KN m 2
 1
Dead load on each cross girder  2  2.5  1.25    3.125  7.05  22.1KN
 2
Assuming this to be uniformly distributed, dead load per meter run of girder
22.1
  8.84 KN / m
2.5
60
Total weight 9.18  8.84  18.02KN / m
21  5
  35 KN
Assuming cross girders to be rigid reaction in each longitudinal girder 3
Live load: maximum bending moment and shear force due to class AA- tracked loading
Figure 23-Live Load on the span
700  2.842
R  498KN
4
498
  166 KN
Maximum bending moment under the wheel load
Figure 24-Max love load cross girder
498
M   1.475  245 KN .m
3
Taking impact factor  1.1 245  270KN.m
Dead load bending moment from 4.75m of support
21  (1.475  1.475)
 35  1.475 
2
=51.625 – 22.84
= 28.78KN.m
Total bending moment =LL BM + DL BM
 270  28.78  298.78KN.m
61
498
 1.1  183KN
Live load shear = 3
Section Design
Total depth = 1500mm, effective depth =1400
298.78  10 6
Ast   1146mm 2
200  0.9  1440
Hence provide 3nos of 25mm diameter bars provide Ast  1473
Shear design
v 214  10 3
v    0.49 N / mm 2   mas
Nominal shear bd 300  1440 ok
N
 c  0.34
But mm 2 , hence provide shear reinforcement
2  78.5  200  1440

Sv   211.28mm
214  10 3
Provide 2L- 10mm diameter bars at 200mm C/C both at intermediate and ends
62
CHAPTER4
COMPARISON
4.1General
This chapter presents comparison of reinforce concrete bridges in Afghanistan the aim of
this comparison is how we can make a bridge which will have economy durability, and
consistency property. For this case I have to compare old and new method design as well
as the current used in Afghanistan. I bring Manual which they used for reinforce concrete
bridges, designing. These manual used AASHTO specification for reinforce concrete
bridges.
The analytical method only applies to slab bridges and deck slab bridges with the main
reinforcement running parallel to the direction of traffic. The slab acts as a one-way slab
in the direction of traffic. Area above the neutral axis acts in compression the reinforcing
steel in the bottom of the slab carries all of the tension and the concrete carries no tension
Only the moment capacity is determined for the slab since shear generally will not control
in thin, reinforced-concrete members Only a one-foot-wide strip of slab at the midspan
should be considered. The longer the slab is in proportion to its width the more the slab is
similar to a beam. In long span slab bridges the slab can be calculated as a beam and only
in details the influence of the slab can be taken into account.
By AASHTO method I worked up in three examples of superstructure the detail of that

examples is used 21m clear span length T-beam girder, one way slab and used four girder
Effective span between every girder 1.9 m
I solve of these three example by IRC (Indian roads congress) Code for the comparison
between old method and new method which will be economy durability, and consistency
property. The detail of superstructure which is solve by IRC code are following.
The Superstructure for 21m effective span is proposed with Reinforced Concrete Deck
slab and cast-in-situ three Reinforced girders which are supported over four cross girders
with a total height of the girders 1.950M at the centre of the span and 1.890M at the end
with two end cross girders supported on the piers. The spacing of R.C. longitudinal
63
girders is 2.5M c/c. The spacing of the cross girders is 3.5M c/c. The deck consists of two
cantilever slabs of 1.750M length from the centre of the end girder. There are two Crash
Barriers at the end of the deck slab. The design of the superstructure is done by the
Working stress method and involves the following procedure:
Deck Slab Design
Design of Longitudinal Girders and Cross Girders.
The bellow examples are used for comparison AASHTO and IRC code
Example: 1
Design reinforce concrete bridge by the given data length (L=21m ) Width (B=7,5m) slab
Thickness(d=20cm) fc = 200Kg/cm2 and fs =1400kg/cm2 ᵧc =2400kg/m3 Sidewalk width
F=50cm
1- Thickness of asphalt 6cm
2 – Insulation of water or waterproof 2cm
3- Protection layer or insulation covers 2 cm
4- Thickness of reinforce concrete slab 20 cm
Example 2
By given data design the reinforce concrete slab bridge Clear span = 5m,Clear
width=7.3m,Live Loading = HS20,Wearing Surface = 8mm bitumen, Concrete Strength
Fc′=250K g /cm2,F y =4000K g /cm2
Example – 3
Design a deck slab bridge according to AASHTO Specification for the following data:
Clear span = 6m Clear width = 7.3m, Wearing Surface = 8mm bitumen, Concrete
Strength Fc=250K g /cm 2, Fy =4000K g /cm,Curb width = 60cm
4.2 General Steps of Comparison
1.The first step deck slab superstructure design is calculation of maximum bending
moment due to dead load
Maximum bending Moment due to Dead load
W  L2 656  1.9 2
M max    296.02kg  m
8 8
64
The design of deck slab by IRC code is support by four side and design of deck slab
which design by AASHTO method is support by two side. Since the slab is supported in
all four sides and used Pigeaud’s curves will be find to get influence coefficients to
compute moments
Moment along the short span  m1  0.15  m2 w
Moment along the long span  m2  0.15  m1 w
Moment along the short  0.047  0.15  0.017552.624  2.611KN  m  266.247kg. m
Moment along the long span  0.0175  0.15  0.04752.624  1.24kN  m  126.44kg.m
2.Second step maximum banding moment due to live load
for Hs20 two axial heavy Vehicles(track) which have 32000lb weight is equal to 14515kg
in the MKS system is centralize.
Maximum bending Moment due to Live load
1.64( S  1) 1.64(1.9  1)
M max  H 20  0.8 14515.2  2987.3kg  m
16 16
On the tope function ( 0.8 ) value for continues beam and 1.64 is constant.
Maximum bending Moment due to impact load The max impact factor to be used shall be
30% percent of Maximum bending Moment due to Live load
Mimpa= 0.3Mmax =0.3  2987.3=896.2Kg.M
0.3 is Coefficient of impact load which find from following function
4.5 4.5
Fimp    0.33  0.3
L  6 7.5  6
find summation of moment
𝐷𝐿 𝐿𝐿 𝑖𝑚𝑝
∑ 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 + 𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 = 296.02 + 2987.3 + 296.07 = 4179.52𝐾𝑔 ∙ 𝑀
For the finding of maximum binding moment due to live load by IRC code class AA
tracked vehicle used Pigeaud’s curves will be find to get influence coefficients to
compute moments
Moment along the short span  m1  0.15  m2 w
65
Moment along the long span  m2  0.15  m1 w
3.25
Effective load on the span  437.5   373.587 KN
3.806
Moment along the shorter span

 7.9  0.15  2.8  10 2  373.589  31.082 KN.m  3169.2kg.m
Moment along the longer span

 (2.8  0.15  7.9)  10 2  373.589  14.887 KN.m  1517.33kg. m
The class AA wheeled vehicle should be placed on the deck slab panel as shown in for
producing the severest moments. The front axle is placed along the centre line with the
62.5 KN wheel at the centre of the panel only three wheels per axle total of six wheels
can be accommodated within the panel. the maximum moments at the centre in the short
span and long span directions are computed for individual wheel loads taken in the order
shown know we find maximum banding moment in the every wheel
Moment along short span
= (19  0.15  15)  10 2  78.1  16.596KN.m  1691.7 kg.m
Moment along the long span
= (15  0.15  19)  10 2  78.1  13.94 KN.m  1421.48kg. m
(b) B.M.due to wheel 2
1
Net B.M. along short span = (32.488  27.89)  2.29 KN.m
2
1
Net B.M. along span  (31.76  26.14)  2.81KN.m
2
Similar procedure as for case (2) we gat
B.M. along the short span =3.86KN.m
66
(5) B.M due to wheel 5
B.M. along long span =1.852KN.m
(6)B.M. due to wheel 6
B.M. along short span =1.799kN.m
B.M. along long span =1.566KN.m
The total banding moment due to all wheels on the span
The total effect is computed as summation of individual effects
Total banding moment along short span
16.596  2.29  3.4  3.86  2.923  1.799  30.868KN.m

Total banding moment along long span
13.94  2.81  4.15  3.14  1.852  1.566  27.45KN.m
Design of bending moment
Class AA tracked vehicle causes heavier moment than wheeled vehicle along the short
span direction. But along the long span direction class AA wheeled vehicle gives the
severe effect. The loads causing maximum effects are adopted for design moments the
above computations assumed assume a simply supported condition along the four edges
in fact the deck slab is continuous to allow for continuity the computed moments are
multiplied by a factor 0.8
Design B.M. along short span  (2.51  30.868)0.8  26.7 KN .m  2722.64kg. m
Design B.M. along long span = (1.24+27.45)0.8= 22.952KN.m = 2340.45 kg.m
3 Stapes Slab thickness
For the finding of the slab thickness we used this formula
2 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥
M max =R bd2 ⇒ 𝑑 = √ 𝑅.𝑏
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 4179,52 ∙ 100

𝑑=√ =√ = 18.4𝑐𝑚
𝑅∙𝑏 12,3 ∙ 100
67
If the cover of the slab is 4cm and reduces of steel bar is 1cm and also the steel bar of slab
is 20mm so we can to find the thickness of slab by the following equation
D=d+a+1com=18.4+4+1=23.4≅25cm
d= D – a = 25 – 4 = 21cm
By IRC method find of the slab thickness is used this formula
M
d provided 
Qb
26.7  1000  1000

Effective depth required =  155.797mm
1.10  1000
4. Step Finding of the quantity of steel bar:
by the following equation, can find the quantity of steel bar on the slab
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 4179.52 ∙ 100
𝐴𝑠 = = = 16,34𝑐𝑚2
𝑓𝑐 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑 1400 ∙ 0.87 ∙ 21
By the using of norm diameter of steel bar 16mm consider. area of one steel bar is equal
to
𝜋 ∙ 𝑑2 3.14 ∙ 1, 62
𝐴1𝑠 = = = 2.0096𝑐𝑚2
4 4
Number of steel bars
𝐴𝑠 16,14
𝑁𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑠 = = = 8.13 ≅ 8
𝐴1𝑠 2.0096
8Φ16mm@12.5cmC/C(As =16.34cm2 )
By the following equation can find longitudinal steel bar for slab
120 120
𝐴𝑠 = > 67% ⟹ = 138
√𝑠 √1,9
As=0.67 ∙16.34= 10.94cm2
6Φ16mm@16.5cmC/C
By the using IRC method Effective depth provided assuming 12mm diameter main bars
= 215 – 40 – 6 = 169 mm
68
26.7  1000  1000
Area of main reinforcement =  877.71mm 2
200  0.90  169
Adopt 12 mm dia. Bars at 110mm centers. Giving an area of 1028mm2
22.952  1000  1000

Area of longitudinal reinforcement   812.17 mm 2
200  0.90  157
Adopt 12mm dia. Bars at 140mm centers gibing an area of 808mm2
4.3 Calculation of loading and moment of girder
1step Maximum bending Moment due to Dead load
Dead load due to weight of girder
0.6∙1.4∙2400 = 2016K g /m
ΣDL=176 + 2016 +1140 = 3332K g /m
q ∙ L2 3332 ∙ 222
Mmax = = = 201586k g ∙ m
8 8
By IRC code Total dead load per m run is =33.64KN
33.64  21  21
Maximum banding moment  1854.4 KN .m  189096.174kg.m
8
2step maximum bending moment due to live load
Impact load and live load
ΣMmax Live L+ImpactL=141813.7+35453.425=176867.13K g ∙M
ΣMmax = 176867.13+201586=378853.125K g ∙M
By IRC method maximum banding moment due to live load
Bending Moment, BM, including Impact Factor and Reaction factor for
Outer girder =1.167  0.945 1374  1515.26KN.m  154513.518 kg.m
Inner girder  1.167  0.67 1374  1074.3KNm  109548.112 kg.m
B.M.=moment due to D.L+ moment due to L.L.
1854.4+1515.26=3369.66KN.m = 343609.69 kg.m
69
3 Step Find Total Shear Force
Total shear force = Live Load + Impact Load + Dead Load
Impact Load = 0.25×28452.7 = 7113.17K g
Live Load = 28452, 7K g
w L 3332.22
Dead load  R A  Rb    3665kg
8 22
ΣDL = 28452.7 + 7113.17 + 3665 = 72217.875K g
shear force due to IRC method
Hence shear at A  RA ' RA  0.3712P  0.3712P
B  RB ' RB  0.535P  0.248P but p=350KN

Hence shear force at outer girder  1.10  0.7452  350  586KN.  59755.37 kg
Hence shear force at inner girder 1.10  0.783  350  623KN  64446.06kg.
4 step find depth of girder

𝑓𝑐, 300
𝑓𝑐 = = = 100𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
3 3
𝑓𝑐 100
𝑅= ∙𝐽∙𝐾 = ∙ 0.87 ∙ 0.404 = 17.57𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
2 2
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 378853.125 ∙ 100

𝑑=√ =√ = 180𝑐𝑚
𝑅∙𝑏 17.57 ∙ 60
The damnation of girder is (60× 180)
By IRC method
Clear cover = 40mm
Height of C.G of bars from bottom of bars = (40  12  32  2)  148mm
d=1725 – 148 = 1577mm<1605mm hence ok
5step finde reinforce for girder

𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 378853.125 × 100
𝐴𝑠 = = = 278,62cm2
𝐹𝑠 ∙ 𝐽 ∙ 𝑑0 1400 0.87 108.5
𝜋 ∙ 𝑑 2 3,14 ∙ 42
𝐴1𝑠 = = = 12.56𝑐𝑚2
4 4
70
𝐴𝑠 274,5𝑐𝑚2
𝑁= 1= = 21.8 ≅ 22𝑛𝑜𝑠
𝐴𝑠 12.56𝑐𝑚2
22∅40𝑚𝑚
Due to IRC method
M max 3369.66  10 6
Ast    11663.75mm 2
 st  j  d 200  0.9  (1605)
Provide 12 bars of 32mm diameter having total A st = 9651mm2 and
Provide 4 bars of 25 mm diameter having total Ast =1964mm2
Arrange these bars in 4 layers with spacing between bars ecual to largest diameter bar
used 32mm
Check for local bond stress as per IRC code
Assume effective depth = 1950 – 60 = 1890mm
605  10 3
recuired 
0.9  1890
355.67
NO.of 32mm bars 
3.142  32
Hence at least 4 bars are to be taken straight
6 Step Testing of girder due to shear force
Virtual Resistance of concrete
𝑅 = 0.25 ∙ √𝑀 = 0.25 ∙ √300 = 17.3𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
𝑅 17.3
𝑓𝑠 = = = 8.65𝑘𝑔 /𝑐𝑚2
𝑆 2
On the top equation S is safety factor which is equal to two (S=2) as we know
6.68k g /cm2<8.65k g /cm2
so the strength of girder is enough for vertical forces or can say stirrups and concrete can
resist these loads.
Shear checking due to IRC code
605  10 3
1 nominal shear stress at support  0.8K N mm 2 ,hence shear
400  1890
reinforcement is necessary.
71
173  10 3
2. nominal shear stress at support   0.25K N mm 2 hence shear
400  1700
reinforcement is not necessary
313  10 3
Nominal shear stress at support   0.46 K N mm 2 , hence provide shear
400  1700
reinforcement approximate distance from support ar which shear stress is 0.5N/mm2
Hence provide 10mm diameter at 180mm c/c at support up to 4.08m. after 4.08m only 2
bars will be effective.
455  10 3
At quarter span remaining shear = 410  10 3   182.5KN
2
2  78.5  200  1700

Spacing of two legged stirrups 10mm diameter   292.49mm
182.5  10 3
Hence provide 2L-10mm diameter bars at 200mm c/c from 4.08m to 5.1m
Beyond 5.1m no bent up bars are available. Therefore shear at 3/8 span
3
 21  7.875  313KN
8
2  78.5  200  1700

Therefore spacing of 10mm diameter bars 2L=  170.54mm
313  10 3
Therefore provide 2L 10MM diameter bars at 150MM c/c
From 7.02M to 8.02M Provide 2L 10MM diameter at 180MM c/c
For remaining distance provide 22L 10MM diameter at 300MM c/c
As we solve that equation by IRC method so we design the deck slab which support by
four side or design two way slabs. On that case is used cross beam which we don’t used
this method on AASHTO code these big difference between IRC method the steps design
are following.
First step is calculation of loading and moment due to did load and live load
Total weight 9.18  8.84  18.02KN / m
21  5
  35 KN
Live load: maximum bending moment and shear force due to class AA- tracked loading
72
Figure 25 -LL on the span
700  2.842
R  498KN
4
498
  166 KN
Maximum bending moment under the wheel load
Figure 26-Max love load cross girder
498
M   1.475  245 KN .m
3
Taking impact factor  1.1 245  270KN.m
Dead load bending moment from 4.75m of support
21  (1.475  1.475)
 35  1.475 
2
=51.625 – 22.84
= 28.78KN.m
Total bending moment =LL BM + DL BM
 270  28.78  298.78KN.m

498
 1.1  183KN
Live load shear = 3
Section Design
Total depth = 1500mm, effective depth =1400
73
298.78  10 6
Ast   1146mm 2
200  0.9  1440
Hence provide 3nos of 25mm diameter bars provide Ast  1473
Shear design
v 214  10 3
v    0.49 N / mm 2   mas
Nominal shear bd 300  1440 ok
N
 c  0.34
But mm 2 , hence provide shear reinforcement
2  78.5  200  1440

Sv   211.28mm
214  10 3
Provide 2L- 10mm diameter bars at 200mm C/C both at intermediate and ends
74
CHAPTER5
MODELING
4.1 Modeling of Girder
I have design a bridge design by IRC and AASHTO method to gave whole report about
design of bridge is coming lots of pages. So I consider only one girder element which is
value of these element is approximant same which I did in numerical part bridge girder
elements with thicknesses defined according to Table were used to model the geometry of
the bridge, see Figure The varying thickness of the girder was defined according to an
analytical expression using the “Analytical field” tool in STAAD Pro The element size
was chosen to 21m length depth of girder is 1.6m breadth is 0.6 by in the remaining parts
of the bridge this girder is design base of IRC and AASHTO code.
Figure 27-Model of Maximum Bending Moment Due To Moving Load
75
Figure 28 - Model of Displacement By IRC Method
Figure 29-Modal of Stress Due To Moving Load
76
Figure 30 -B.M .Due To Moving Load BY AASHTO Method
Figure 31-displacement due to moving load by AASHTO method
77
Figure 32 - model of stress by AASHTO method
Figure 33-model of girder by IRC code
5.2 maximum bending moment by IRC method
As consider the maximum bending moment only one girder so moment is finding due to
live load, dead load and impact load. So this moment value is approximate same with the
value of numerical part.
78
Table 4-Maximum binding moment by IRC method
Beam L/C Dist m Mz kNm
1 1 LIVE LOAD Max +ve 21 0
Max -ve 10.5 -1246.88
2 Dead Load Max +ve 21 0
Max -ve 10.5 -2094.75
3 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 3 Max +ve 21 0
Max -ve 10.5 -3341.63
Figure 34-B.M diagram
5.3 Maximum shear force by IRC method
Table 5-Maximum shear force
Beam L/C Dist m Fy kN
1 1 LOAD CASE 1 Max +ve 0 237.501
Max –ve 21 -237.501
2 LOAD CASE 2 Max +ve 0 399
Max –ve 21 -399
3 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 3 Max +ve 0 636.501
Max –ve 21 -636.501
79
Figure 35 -shear diagram
5.4 Maximum Deflection by IRC method
Table 6-Maximum deflection due to dead load and live load
Bea L/C Dist x y mm z Resultant

m m mm mm mm
1 1 LOAD CASE 1 0 0 0 0 0
5.25 0 -9.122 0 9.122
10.5 0 - 0 12.806
12.806
15.75 0.00 -9.122 0 9.122

1
21 0 0 0 0
2 LOAD CASE 2 0 0 0 0 0
5.25 0 - 0 15.324
15.324
10.5 0 - 0 21.514
80
21.514
15.75 0.00 - 0 15.324

1 15.324
21 0 0 0 0
3 COMBINATION LOAD 0 0 0 0 0
CASE 3
5.25 0 - 0 24.446
24.446
10.5 0 -34.32 0 34.32
15.75 0.00 - 0 24.446

1 24.446
21 0 0 0 0
Figure 36 -maximum deflection
81
5.5 Maximum stress by IRC code
Table 7-maximum stress
Figure 37 -maximum stress
5.6 Design of girder by IRC code
82
Figure 38 -modal of girder
5.7 Maximum bending moment by ASSHTO method
Table 8-Maximum bending moment due to AASHTO code
Beam L/C Dist m Mz kNm
1 1 dead load Max +ve 21 0
Max -ve 10.5 -1246.88
2 live load Max +ve 0 0
Max -ve 10.5 -1764
3 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 3 Max +ve 21 0
Max -ve 10.5 -3010.88
83
Figure 39 -B.M diagram
5.8 Maximum shear force by ASSHTO code
Table 9-Maximum shear force due to ASSHTO code
Beam L/C Dist m Fy kN
1 1 dead load Max +ve 0 237.501
Max -ve 21 -237.501
2 live load Max +ve 0 336
Max -ve 21 -336
3 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 3 Max +ve 0 573.501
Max –ve 21 -573.501
Figure 40 -shear diagram
5.9Maximum deflection by AASHTO method
84
Table 5.7 Table 10-maximum deflection
Beam L/C Dist m x mm y mm z mm Resultant mm
1 1 dead load 0 0 0 0 0
5.25 0 -9.122 0 9.122
10.5 0 -12.806 0 12.806
15.75 0.001 -9.122 0 9.122
21 0 0 0 0
2 live load 0 0 0 0 0
5.25 0 -12.905 0 12.905
10.5 0 -18.117 0 18.117
15.75 0.001 -12.905 0 12.905
21 0 0 0 0
3 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 3 0 0 0 0 0
5.25 0 -22.026 0 22.026
10.5 0 -30.923 0 30.923
15.75 0.001 -22.026 0 22.026
21 0 0 0 0
Figure 41 -maximum deflection
85
5.10 Modal Maximum stress by AASHTO method
Table 11-maximum stress
Figure 42 -maximum stress
Finding of reinforce
86
CHAPTER6
PRESTRESS I BEAM WITH COMPOSITE SLAB
6.1 Ultimate Flexure
Live Load Distribution Factors
Live Load Distribution Factors for Moment in Interior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1
- Verify spacing of beams

1100mm ≤ S=2500mm ≤ 4900mm O.K.
- Verify depth of concrete slab
110mm ≤ ts=250mm ≤ 305mm O.K.
- Verify span length
6000mm ≤ L=30000mm ≤ 73000mm O.K.
- Verify number of beams
Nb=4 ≥ 3 O.K.
- Verify longitudinal stiffness parameter Kg
4.00E+09 mm^4 ≤ Kg=1.28E+12 mm^4 ≤ 3.00E+12 mm^4 O.K.
- Verify overhang size
-300mm ≤ de=810mm ≤ 1700mm O.K.
Roadway, Lane, Curb and Wheel Layout:
Roadway Width brd = 9.120 m = 9120 mm

Wheel Spacing bwh = 1.829 m = 1829 mm
Wheel to Curb Distance bcrb = 0.610 m = 610 mm
Beam Spacing S = 2.500 m = 2500 mm
87
Exterior Edge of Slab to Interior Face of Curb bslb = 0.000 m = 0 mm
Exterior Edge of Slab to CL Exterior Beam bbm = 0.810 m = 810 mm
Distribution factor for moment for 1 design lane loaded:

0.1
𝑆 0.4 𝑆 0.3 𝐾𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖1 = 0.06 + ( ) ( ) ( 3)
4300 𝐿 𝐿𝑡𝑠
2500 0.4 2500 0.3 1.28𝐸 + 12 0.1
= 0.06 + ( ) ( ) ( ) = 0.484
4300 30000 30000 × 2503
Distribution factor for moment for 2 or more design lanes loaded:
0.1
𝑆 0.6 𝑆 0.2 𝐾𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖2 = 0.075 + ( ) ( ) ( 3)
2500 0.6 2500 0.2 1.28𝐸 + 12 0.1
= 0.075 + ( ) ( ) ( ) = 0.691
2900 30000 30000 × 2503
Since Nb>3 lever rule not applicable.
Governing distribution factor:
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥(𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖2 ) = max(0.484; 0.691) = 0.691
Live Load Distribution Factors for Moments in Exterior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.2d-1
Distribution factor for moment for 1 design lane loaded (lever rule) - calculate how many
wheels fit between beams:
𝑆 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚 − 𝑏𝑠𝑙𝑏 − 𝑏𝑐𝑟𝑏 2500 + 810 − 0 − 610
𝑛𝑤ℎ = 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑟 ( ) + 1 = 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑟 ( )+1=2
𝑏𝑤ℎ 1829
𝑛𝑤ℎ = min(2, 𝑛𝑤ℎ ) = 2

𝑏𝑏𝑚 − 𝑏𝑠𝑙𝑏 − 𝑏𝑐𝑟𝑏 𝑏𝑤ℎ 810 − 0 − 610 1829
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒1 = 𝑚 (1 + − ) = 1.2 × (1 + − )
𝑆 2𝑆 2500 2 × 2500
= 0.857

𝑑𝑒 810
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒2 = (0.77 + ) 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 = (0.77 + ) × 0.691 = 0.732
2800 2800
=> Since Nb = 4 > 3 lever rule does not need to be verified.
88
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑒 = max(𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒2 ) = max(0.857; 0.732) = 0.857
Moment Skew Correction Factor for Girders Cross Section Type ‘k’ LRFD4.6.2.2.2e
Check difference between adjacent supports skew angles:
∆𝜃 = |𝜃𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝜃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 | = |0° − 0°| = 0° ≤ 10°O.K.
Controlling Support Skew Angle:
𝜃 = min(𝜃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ; 𝜃𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ; 60°) = min(|0°|; |0°|; 60°) = 0.0°
Moment Skew Correction Factor:
since θ < 30˚ then c1 = 0.0
𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 1 − 𝑐1 (tan 𝜃)1.5 = 1 − 0.000 × (tan 0.0°)1.5 = 1.000
Summary of live load distribution factors for moment
Internal girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒎𝒊 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 × 𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 0.691 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟗𝟏
External girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒎𝒆 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑒 × 𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 0.857 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟓𝟕
Figure 43 -maximum moment diagram interior girder
6.2Ultimate FlexureDemands
Virtual Combinations
89
AASHTO LRFD Section 4.6.2.2.1 calls for permanent loads of and on the deck to be
distributed evenly among the girders, while live load to be distributed based on the LLD
factors. To capture the distribution of various types of loads into the individual girders the
program generates virtual combination for each combination present in the design
request. First the program splits all Load Cases present in the combination into two
groups -nonmoving and moving - depending on their Design Load Types. In next step it
multiplies the user defined scale factor of Load Cases contained within the non-moving
group by 1/n (where n=4 is the number of girders). Next it multiplies the user defined
scale factor of Load Cases contained within the moving group by the section cut values of
the LLD factors (exterior moment, exterior shear, interior moment and interior shear LLD
factors).
At the Section Cut being analyzed, the entire section cut forces are read from CSiBridge
for every virtual combination generated. The forces are assigned to individual girders
based on their designation. (Forces from virtual combinations generated for exterior beam
are assigned to both exterior beams, and similarly, virtual combinations for interior beams
are assigned to interior beams.)
Table 12-User Defined Combinations
Combination Load Case Design Load Group Design Load Scale Factor
Name Type Action
Str-I2 DEAD Dead Non-moving Non- 0.9

Composite
Str-I2 live load Vehicle Live Moving Short-Term 1.75

Composite
Str-I2 Prestress Prestress Non-moving Long-Term 1

Composite

Composite

Composite

Composite
90
Composite

Composite

Composite
Virtual Combinations for Moment at Internal Girder. The scale factor of non-moving load
cases is multiplied by 1/4 and scale factor of moving load cases is multiplied by
DFmi=0.691.
Table 6.2 Table 13-User Defined Combinations internal girder
Combination Load Case Group Scale Factor

Name
Str-I2 Virtual DEAD Non-moving 0.2250
Str-I2 Virtual live load Moving 1.2093
Str-I2 Virtual prestress Non-moving 0.2500
Virtual Combinations for Moment at External Girder. The scale factor of non-moving
load cases is multiplied by 1/4 and scale factor of moving load cases is multiplied by
DFme=0.857.
91
Table 14-Virtual Combinations internal girder

Name
Str-I2 Virtual Prestress Non-moving 0.2500
Table 15-Summary of Moment Demands
Location Combination Combination Moment Mu Max Moment Mu Min

Max Min
Left Exterior Str-I2 Virtual Str-I1 Virtual 4309kN-m 3111kN-m

Girder
Interior girder 1 Str-I2 Virtual Str-I1 Virtual 4309kN-m 3111kN-m
Right Exterior Str-I2 Virtual Str-I1 Virtual 4309kN-m 3111kN-m

Girder
92
6.3Ultimate FlexureResistance
Flexural Capacity Interior girder 1
Figure 45 -flexural capacity diagram
Girder Capacity in Positive Flexure per AASHTO LRFD 2012 with 2013 Interim
Revisions
ϕ = 0.9 h = 2.079 m = 2079 mm

bslab = 2.500 m = 2500 mm hslab = 0.250 m = 250 mm
btop = 1.067 m = 1067 mm hftop = 0.160 m = 160 mm
bbot = 0.294 m = 294 mm hfbot = 0.711 m = 711 mm
93
bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm dp pos = 0.889 m = 889 mm
Aps pos = 10398 mm^2 ds pos = 0.000 m = 0 mm
As pos = 0 mm^2 f'cslab = 27.6 MPa
f'beam = 41.4 MPa fpu = 1034.2 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa
Prestressing factor
𝑓𝑝𝑦 827
𝑘 = 2 (1.04 − 𝑓 ) = 2 (1.04 − 1034) = 0.480
𝑝𝑢
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2
Concrete stress block factor

0.05 0.05
𝛽1 = 0.85 − (𝑓 ′ 𝑐 − 28.0) × 7
= 0.85 − (27.6 − 28.0) × 7
= 0.85
LRFD sec. 6.7.2.2
Assume rectangular section behavior and yielding of tension reinforcement; the

compression reinforcement is ignored. Calculate distance between neutral axis and the
compressive face
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑢 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 10398 × 1034 + 0 × 413.7
𝑐= 𝑓𝑝𝑢
= 1034
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽1 𝑏 + 𝑘𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.85 × 27.6 × 0.85 × 2500 + 0.480 × 10398 ×
𝑑𝑝 889
= 193 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-4
- interpolate the compression controlled mild steel strain limit εcl:

0.004 − 0.002 0.004 − 0.002
𝜀𝑐𝑙 = 0.002 + (𝑓𝑦 − 413.9) = 0.002 + (413.7 − 413.9)
690.0 − 413.9 690.0 − 413.9
= 0.002
LRFD 5.7.2.1
- verify assumption for stress in mild steel:

𝑐 193 0.003 0.003
= = 𝐼𝑛𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑦 > 0.003+𝜀 = 0.003+0.002 = 0.60 N.G.
𝑑𝑠 0 𝑐𝑙
The criteria for replacing fy for fs as stated in LRFD section 5.7.2.1. is not satisfied. The
stress fs used in the moment resistance equation has been scaled down to 413.7MPa. Note
that the LRFD code recommends instead using strain compatibility to determine stress in
94
the mild steel reinforcement.
Warning
- verify assumption for rectangular section behavior 0 < 𝑎 ≤ ℎ𝑓 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1
𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1 = 193 × 0.85 = 164𝑚𝑚 ≤ ℎ𝑓 = 250𝑚𝑚 O.K.
Average stress in prestressing steel

𝑐 193
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 𝑓𝑝𝑢 (1 − 𝑘 𝑑 ) = 1034.2 × (1 − 0.480 × 889) = 926.3 𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝑝
LRFDeq. 5.7.3.1.1.-1
Flexural resistance
𝑐𝛽1 𝑐𝛽1
𝑀𝑟 = 𝜑 (𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 (𝑑𝑝 − ) + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 (𝑑𝑠 − )) =
2 2
193 × 0.85 193 × 0.85

0.9 × (10398 × 926.3 × (889 − ) + 0 × 413.7 × (0 − ))
2 2
= 6993458677 𝑁𝑚𝑚 = 6993 𝑘𝑁𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.2.2-1
Interior girder 1 Demand over Capacity Ratio for Positive Flexure

𝑫 𝑀𝑢 4309
= = = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟏𝟔
𝑪 𝑀𝑟 6993
O.K
Girder Capacity in Negative Flexure
ϕ = 0.9 bbot = 0.711 m = 711 mm

hfbot = 0.294 m = 294 mm bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm
dp neg = 1.190 m = 1190 mm Aps neg = 10398 mm^2
ds neg = 0.000 m = 0 mm As neg = 0 mm^2
f'cbeam = 41.4 MPa fpu = 1034.2 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa
Prestressing factor
𝑓𝑝𝑦 827
𝑘 = 2 (1.04 − 𝑓 ) = 2 (1.04 − 1034) = 0.48
𝑝𝑢
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2
95
compressive face
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑢 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 10398 × 1034 + 0 × 413.7
𝑐= 𝑓𝑝𝑢
= 1034
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽1 𝑏 + 𝑘𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.85 × 41 × 0.75 × 711 + 0.48 × 10398 × 1190
𝑑𝑝
= 463 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-4

𝑐 463 0.003 0.003
= = 𝐼𝑛𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑦 > 0.003+𝜀 = 0.003+0.002 = 0.60 N.G.
𝑑𝑠 0 𝑐𝑙
stress fs used in the moment resistance equation has been scaled down to 413.69MPa.
Note that the LRFD code recommends instead using strain compatibility to determine
stress in the mild steel reinforcement.
Warning
- verify assumption for rectangular section behavior 0 < 𝑎 ≤ ℎ𝑓 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1
𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1 = 463 × 0.75 = 348𝑚𝑚 > ℎ𝑓 = 294𝑚𝑚 N.G.
Recalculate c based on T section behavior
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑢 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 − 0.85𝑓′𝑐 (𝑏 − 𝑏𝑤 )ℎ𝑓

𝑐= 𝑓𝑝𝑢
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽1 𝑏𝑤 + 𝑘𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑑𝑝
10398 × 1034 + 0 × 413.7 − 0.85 × 41.4 × (711 − 203) × 294

= 1034
0.85 × 41.4 × 0.75 × 203 + 0.48 × 10398 × 1190
= 566 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-3

𝑐 566
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 𝑓𝑝𝑢 (1 − 𝑘 𝑑 ) = 1034.2 × (1 − 0.48 × 1190) = 798.214035729912 𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝑝
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1.-1
Flexural resistance
𝑐𝛽1 𝑐𝛽1 𝑐𝛽1 ℎ𝑓

𝑀𝑟 = 𝜑 (𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 (𝑑𝑝 − ) + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 (𝑑𝑠 − ) + 0.85𝑓′𝑐 (𝑏 − 𝑏𝑤 )ℎ𝑓 ( − )) =
2 2 2 2
96
566×0.75 566×0.75
0.9 × (10398 × 798.2 × (1190 − ) + 0 × 413.69 × (0.0 − ) + 0.85 ×
2 2
566×0.75 294
41.4 × (711 − 203) × 294 × ( − )) = 7607304339 𝑁𝑚𝑚 = 7607 𝑘𝑁𝑚
2 2
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.2.2-1
Interior girder 1 Demand over Capacity Ratio for Negative Flexure

𝑫 𝑀𝑢 3111
= = −7607 < 0 => 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎O.K
𝑪 𝑀𝑟
6.4Ultimate FlexureSummary Tables
Table 16-Section Cut Summary
h
Concrete b h bf hf bf hf Girde CG CG f'c f'c
Geometry Slab Slab Top Top bw Bot Bot r Top Bot Slab Beam
Units mm Mm mm mm mm mm mm Mm mm mm MPa MPa
Left Exterior 2060 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 768 1311 27.6 41.4
Girder
Interior 2500 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 721 1358 27.6 41.4
girder 1
Interior 2500 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 721 1358 27.6 41.4
girder 2
Right 2060 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 768 1311 27.6 41.4
Exterior
Girder
Legend:
b Slab - Tributary width of the composite slab.
h Slab - Equivalent thickness of the composite slab.
97
bf Top - Precast beam top flange width.
hf Top - Precast beam top flange thickness.
bw - Precast beam web width.
bf Bot - Precast beam bottom flange width.
hf Bot - Precast beam bottom flange thickness.
h Girder - Depth of the girder (beam plus slab).
CG Top - Distance from centroid of composite section to the topmost point of the bridge
section.
CG Bot - Distance from centroid of composite section to the bottommost point of the
bridge section.
f'c Slab - Composite slab concrete strength.
f'c Beam - Precast beam concrete strength.
PT and Aps Aps dp dp As As ds ds fpu fpu fs fs k k

Rebar Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos fys Neg Pos Neg Pos
mm mm mm mm
Units ^2 ^2 Mm mm ^2 ^2 mm mm MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa - -
Left 103 103 119 889 0 0 0 0 103 103 413. 413. 413. 0.48 0.48
Exterior 98 98 0 4.2 4.2 7 7 7 0 0
Girder
Interior 103 103 119 889 0 0 0 0 103 103 413. 413. 413. 0.48 0.48
girder 1 98 98 0 4.2 4.2 7 7 7 0 0
Interior 103 103 119 889 0 0 0 0 103 103 413. 413. 413. 0.48 0.48
girder 2 98 98 0 4.2 4.2 7 7 7 0 0
Right 103 103 119 889 0 0 0 0 103 103 413. 413. 413. 0.48 0.48
Exterior 98 98 0 4.2 4.2 7 7 7 0 0
Girder
Legend:
Aps Neg - Area of top prestress tendons.
Aps Pos - Area of bottom prestress tendons.
dp Neg - Distance from the bottom fiber to the centroid of those tendons that are located
above the bottom compression zone.
dp Pos - Distance from the top fiber to the centroid of those tendons that are located
below the top compression zone.
As Neg - Area of top reinforcement.
98
As Pos - Area of bottom reinforcement.
ds Neg - Distance from the bottom fiber to the centroid of those rebars that are located
ds Pos - Distance from the top fiber to the centroid of those rebars that are located below
the top compression zone.
fpu Neg - Specified tensile strength of top prestress tendons (weighted average).
fpu Pos - Specified tensile strength of bottom prestress tendons (weighted average).
fys - Yield strength of longitudinal rebar.
fs Neg - Stress in longitudinal rebar located in tensile zone for negative moment.
fs Pos - Stress in longitudinal rebar located in tensile zone for positive moment.
k Neg - Factor k per eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2 top.
k Pos - Factor k per eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2 bottom.
Table 18-Section legend Summary
Compressio TSect TSect Beta1 Beta1 a Loc a Loc fps fps

n Block Pos Neg Pos Neg c Pos c Neg a Pos a Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg
Units - - - - mm mm mm Mm - - MPa MPa
No Yes 0.85 0.75 230 566 195 427 In Into 906.1 798.2
Left Exterior
top web
Girder
slab
No Yes 0.85 0.75 193 566 164 427 In Into 926.3 798.2
Interior
top web
girder 1
slab
No Yes 0.85 0.75 193 566 164 427 In Into 926.3 798.2
Interior
top web
girder 2
slab
Right No Yes 0.85 0.75 230 566 195 427 In Into 906.1 798.2
Exterior top web
Girder slab
Legend:
TSect Pos - Is section T section for positive moment?
TSect Neg - Is section T section for negative moment?
Beta1 Pos - Stress block factor per 5.7.2.2 for positive moment.
Beta1 Neg - Stress block factor per 5.7.2.2 for negative moment.
99
c Pos - Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis for positive
moment.
c Neg - Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis for negative
moment.
a Pos - Depth of the equivalent compression stress block for positive moment.
a Neg - Depth of the equivalent compression stress block for negative moment.
a Loc Pos - Extend of equivalent compression stress block for positive moment
a Loc Neg - Extend of equivalent compression stress block for positive moment
fps Pos - Average stress in the prestressing steel at nominal bending resistance for
positive moment (eq. 5.7.3.1.1-1).
fps Neg - Average stress in the prestressing steel at nominal bending resistance for
negative moment (eq. 5.7.3.1.1-1).
Table 19-moment resistance Summary
Dem Dem
Moment LLDF Mr Mu Comb Set Mr Mu Comb Set
Resistance Mom Φ Pos Pos o Pos Pos Neg Neg o Neg Neg
Units - - KNm KNm - - KNm KNm - -
Left Exterior 0.857 0.90 6710.6 4308.8 Str-I2 DSet2 7607.3 3111.3 Str-I1 DSet2
Girder
Interior girder 0.691 0.90 6993.5 4308.8 Str-I2 DSet1 7607.3 3111.3 Str-I1 DSet2
1
Interior girder 0.691 0.90 6993.5 4308.8 Str-I2 DSet2 7607.3 3111.3 Str-I1 DSet2
2
Right Exterior 0.857 0.90 6710.6 4308.8 Str-I2 DSet1 7607.3 3111.3 Str-I1 DSet2
Girder
Legend:
LLDF Mom - Live load distribution factor for moment.
φ - Resistance factor.
Mr Pos - Factored resistance for positive bending.
Mu Pos - Controlling positive bending demand moment.
Combo Pos - Name of combination that controls positive moment demand.
Dem Set Pos - Name of demand set that controls positive moment demand.
Mr Neg - Factored resistance for negative bending.
Mu Neg - Controlling negative bending demand moment.
100
Combo Neg - Name of combination that controls negative moment demand.
Dem Set Neg - Name of demand set that controls negative moment demand.
6.5Ultimate Shear
Live Load Distribution Factors interior girder
Live Load Distribution Factors for Moment in Interior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1

1100mm ≤ S=2500mm ≤ 4900mm O.K.
110mm ≤ ts=250mm ≤ 305mm O.K.
6000mm ≤ L=30000mm ≤ 73000mm O.K.
Nb=4 ≥ 3 O.K.
- Verify longitudinal stiffness parameter Kg
4.00E+09 mm^4 ≤ Kg=1.28E+12 mm^4 ≤ 3.00E+12 mm^4 O.K.
- Verify overhang size
-300mm ≤ de=810mm ≤ 1700mm O.K.
101
Roadway, Lane, Curb and Wheel Layout:
Roadway Width brd = 9.120 m = 9120 mm

Wheel Spacing bwh = 1.829 m = 1829 mm
Wheel to Curb Distance bcrb = 0.610 m = 610 mm
Beam Spacing S = 2.500 m = 2500 mm
Exterior Edge of Slab to Interior Face of Curb bslb = 0.000 m = 0 mm
Exterior Edge of Slab to CL Exterior Beam bbm = 0.810 m = 810 mm

0.1
𝑆 0.4 𝑆 0.3 𝐾𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖1 = 0.06 + ( ) ( ) ( 3)
2500 0.4 2500 0.3 1.28𝐸 + 12 0.1
= 0.06 + ( ) ( ) ( ) = 0.484
4300 30000 30000 × 2503
Distribution factor for moment for 2 or more design lanes loaded:
0.1
𝑆 0.6 𝑆 0.2 𝐾𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖2 = 0.075 + ( ) ( ) ( 3)
2500 0.6 2500 0.2 1.28𝐸 + 12 0.1
= 0.075 + ( ) ( ) ( ) = 0.691
2900 30000 30000 × 2503
Since Nb>3 lever rule not applicable.
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥(𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑖2 ) = max(0.484; 0.691) = 0.691
Live Load Distribution Factors for Moments in Exterior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
Distribution factor for moment for 1 design lane loaded (lever rule) - calculate how many
wheels fit between beams:
𝑆 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚 − 𝑏𝑠𝑙𝑏 − 𝑏𝑐𝑟𝑏 2500 + 810 − 0 − 610
𝑛𝑤ℎ = 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑟 ( ) + 1 = 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑟 ( )+1=2
𝑏𝑤ℎ 1829
𝑛𝑤ℎ = min(2, 𝑛𝑤ℎ ) = 2

𝑏𝑏𝑚 − 𝑏𝑠𝑙𝑏 − 𝑏𝑐𝑟𝑏 𝑏𝑤ℎ 810 − 0 − 610 1829
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒1 = 𝑚 (1 + − ) = 1.2 × (1 + − )
𝑆 2𝑆 2500 2 × 2500
= 0.857
102
𝑑𝑒 810
𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒2 = (0.77 + ) 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 = (0.77 + ) × 0.691 = 0.732
2800 2800
=> since Nb = 4 > 3 lever rule does not need to be verified.
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑒 = max(𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑚𝑒2 ) = max(0.857; 0.732) = 0.857
Moment Skew Correction Factor for Girders Cross Section Type ‘k’
LRFD 4.6.2.2.2e
Check difference between adjacent supports skew angles:
∆𝜃 = |𝜃𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝜃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 | = |0° − 0°| = 0° ≤ 10°
O.K.
𝜃 = min(𝜃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ; 𝜃𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ; 60°) = min(|0°|; |0°|; 60°) = 0.0°
Moment Skew Correction Factor:
since θ < 30˚ then c1 = 0.0
𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 1 − 𝑐1 (tan 𝜃)1.5 = 1 − 0.000 × (tan 0.0°)1.5 = 1.000
Summary of live load distribution factors for moment
Internal girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒎𝒊 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑖 × 𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 0.691 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟗𝟏
External girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒎𝒆 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑚𝑒 × 𝑆𝑐𝑚𝑜𝑚 = 0.857 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟓𝟕
Live Load Distribution Factors for Shear in Interior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.3a-1

1100mm ≤ S=2500mm ≤ 4900mm O.K.
103
110mm ≤ ts=250mm ≤ 305mm O.K.
6000mm ≤ L=30000mm ≤ 73000mm O.K.
Nb=4 ≥ 3 O.K.
Distribution factor for shear for 1 design lane loaded:

𝑆 2500
𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑖1 = 0.36 + = 0.36 + = 0.688
7600 7600
Distribution factor for shear for 2 or more design lanes loaded:
𝑆 𝑆 2.0
2500 2500 2.0
𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑖2 = 0.2 + −( ) = 0.2 + −( ) = 0.829
3600 10700 3600 10700
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑣𝑖 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥(𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑖1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑖2 ) = max(0.688; 0.829) = 0.829
Live Load Distribution Factors for Shear in Exterior Beams Cross Section Type ‘k’
- Verify overhang de. The curb is located 0mm from the exterior edge of the top slab. The
exterior edge of the top slab is 810mm away from the centerline of exterior web.
−300𝑚𝑚 ≤ 𝑑𝑒 = 810𝑚𝑚 − 0𝑚𝑚 = 810𝑚𝑚 ≤ 1700𝑚𝑚O.K.

Use lever rule results calculated for exterior beam moment distribution factor:
𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑒1 = 0.857

𝑑𝑒 810
𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑒2 = (0.6 + ) × 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑣𝑖 = (0.6 + ) × 0.829 = 0.717
3000 3000
𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑣𝑒 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥(𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑒1 ; 𝐷𝐹𝑣𝑒2 ) = max(0.857; 0.717) = 0.857
Shear Skew Correction Factor for Girders Cross Section Type ‘d’
LRFD 4.6.2.2.3c-1

104
𝜃 = max(𝜃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ; 𝜃𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ) = max(|0°|; |0°|) = 0°
- Verify skew angle

0 < θ=0 ≤ 60 O.K.
Shear Skew Correction Factor:
0.3 0.3
𝐿𝑡𝑠3 30000 × 2503
𝑆𝑐𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 1.0 + 0.20 ( ) tan 𝜃 = 1.0 + 0.20 × ( ) tan 0.0°
𝐾𝑔 1,282,886,583,243
= 1.000
Summary of live load distribution factors for shear
Internal girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒗𝒊 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡_𝑣𝑖 × 𝑆𝑐𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 0.829 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟐𝟗
External girder:
𝑫𝑭𝒗𝒆 = 𝐷𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑣𝑒 × 𝑆𝑐𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 0.857 × 1.000 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟓𝟕
Figure 48 -maximum shear diagram interior girder
6.6 Ultimate ShearDemands
105
factors).
Table 20-User Defined Combinations:
Name Type Action
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
DFmi=0.691.
Table 21-User Defined Combinations:
106
Name
DFme=0.857.
Table 22-for DF 0.857

Name
Virtual Combinations for Shear at Internal Girder. The scale factor of non-moving load
DFvi=0.829.
107
Name
Virtual Combinations for Shear at External Girder. The scale factor of non-moving load
DFve=0.857.

Name
Table 25-Summary of Demands Controlling Shear D/C
Location Combination and Moment Mu Shear Vu Shear Vp

Step
Left Exterior Str-I1 Virtual 3111kN-m -508kN 0kN
Girder Min
Interior girder 1 Str-I1 Virtual 3111kN-m -508kN 0kN
Min
Min
Right Exterior Str-I1 Virtual 3111kN-m -508kN 0kN
Girder Min
108
Table Notes:
1. The above table summarizes demands that control the shear demand over
capacity ratio.
2. The shear Vp is component in the direction of the applied shear of the

effective prestressing force. Vp that has the same sign as Vu indicates that
the prestressing component is resisting the applied shear. When LLD
factors are used the Vp component from entire section cut is uniformly
distributed to all girders.
3. The Step indicates the extremes (max or min) for each force type that were
used in the calculation of the resistance.
4. The label -CodeMinMuPos or -CodeMinMuNeg that may appear in

column Step indicates that the moment component was controlled by
|𝑀𝑢 | > |𝑉𝑢 − 𝑉𝑝 |𝑑𝑣 as required by AASHTO LRFD Section 5.8.3.4.2-4.
109
6.7 Ultimate Shear Resistance
Shear Capacity Interior girder 1
Figure 50 -shear capacity interior girder
ϕf = 0.90 ϕv = 0.90
ϕc = 1.00 f'c = 41.4 MPa
Ec = 30441.7 MPa fpu = 1034.2 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa Es = 199948 MPa
h = 2.079 m = 2079 mm bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm
bv = 0.203 m = 203 mm Act = 360515 mm^2
dp = 0.889 m = 889 mm Aps = 10398 mm^2
ds = 0.000 m = 0 mm As = 0 mm^2
D/C Ratio and Transverse Reinforcement
The demands that control the D/C ratio and transverse reinforcement are:
Combination: Str-I1; Step: Min

Mu=3111.3 kNm
110
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=-117.1 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
Calculate effective shear depth:
From flexural capacity calculations the depth of the equivalent compression block for
positive bending is a=164 mm.
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 𝑑𝑝 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑠 10398 × 926.3 × 889 + 0 × 413.7 × 0
𝑑𝑒 = = = 889 𝑚𝑚
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 10398 × 926.3 + 0 × 413.7
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.9-2
𝑑𝑣 = max(0.9𝑑𝑒 , 0.72ℎ, 𝑑𝑒 − 0.5𝑎)

= max(0.9 × 889, 0.72 × 2079, 889 − 0.5 × 164) = 1497 𝑚𝑚
Verify if concrete in the web will not crush prior to yield of the transverse reinforcement:
|𝑉𝑢 − 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | |−507852.7 − 0.90 × (−117066.6)|

𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = = = 0.14
𝜑𝑣 (0.25𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 ) 0.90 × (0.25 × 41.4 × 203 × 1497)
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.3-2

O.K.
Verify if minimum transverse reinforcement is provided:
Average area of provided shear reinforcement per unit length within distance
0.5𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = 0.5 × 1497 × cot(27.65𝑑𝑒𝑔) = 1428 𝑚𝑚 measured upstation and
downstation from section cut is Avprov=0 mm2/mm.
𝐴𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑣 203 𝑚𝑚2 𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 𝑚𝑚2

= 0.083√𝑓′𝑐 = 0.083√41.4 = 0.2622 > =0
𝑠 𝑓𝑦 413.7 𝑚𝑚 𝑠 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.5-1
Section does not contain at least minimum amount of shear reinforcement.
Calculate net longitudinal tensile strain at the centroid of the tension reinforcement:
|3111.3×106 |
+ 0.5 × (0) + |−507853 − (−117067)| − 10398 × 0.7 × 1034.2
1497
= =0
199948 × 0 + 206842.7 × 10398
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
Since εsinit<0 replace denominator with 𝐸𝑠 𝐴𝑠 + 𝐸𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠 + 𝐸𝑐 𝐴𝑐𝑡
111
|𝑀𝑢 |
+ 0.5𝑁𝑢 + |𝑉𝑢 − 𝑉𝑝 | − 𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.7𝑓𝑝𝑢
𝑑𝑣
𝜀𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡 =
𝐸𝑠 𝐴𝑠 + 𝐸𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠 + 𝐸𝑐 𝐴𝑐𝑡
|3111.3×106 |
+ 0.5 × (0) + |−507853 − (−117067)| − 10398 × 0.7 × 1034.2
1497
=
199948 × 0 + 206842.7 × 10398 + 360515 × 30441.7
= −0.00038535
Verify if axial tension is large enough to crack the section:

𝑁𝑢 0
= = 0.0 𝑀𝑃𝑎 ≤ 0.52√𝑓′𝑐 = 0.52 × √41.4
𝐴𝑐 1482320
= 3.3 𝑀𝑃𝑎 => 𝑛𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
Verify limits on strain εsinit:
-0.0004 ≤ εsinit≤ 0.006 => εs=3.0442E+07
Calculate Parameters β and θ:
Calculate the crack spacing parameter:

35 35
𝑠𝑥𝑒 = 𝑠𝑥 = 200 × = 152𝑚𝑚
𝑎𝑥 + 16 30 + 16
LRFD eq 5.8.3.4.2-5
Verify limits on sxe:
305mm ≤ sxe≤ 2030mm => sxe=305mm
Since section does not contain at least the minimum amount of shear reinforcement, the
value of β is calculated as:
4.8 51𝑥25.4 4.8 51𝑥25.4
𝛽= = × = 6.30
1 + 750𝜀𝑠 39𝑥25.4 + 𝑠𝑥𝑒 1 + 750 × 3.0442𝐸 + 07 39𝑥25.4 + 305
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-2
𝜃 = 29 + 3500𝜀𝑠 = 29 + 3500 × 3.0442𝐸 + 07 = 27.65𝑑𝑒𝑔

LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-3
Calculate shear resistance of concrete:
𝑉𝑐 = 0.083𝛽 √𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 = 0.083 × 6.30 × √41.4 × 203 × 1497 = 1022875𝑁

= 1022.9𝑘𝑁
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-1
Calculate shear resistance of provided vertical reinforcement:
112
𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣
𝑉𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = 0 × 413.7 × 1497 × cot 27.65° = 0𝑁 = 0.0𝑘𝑁
𝑠
LRFD eq C5.8.3.3-1
Determine nominal shear resistance of the section:
𝑉𝑛 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(𝑉𝑐 + 𝑉𝑠 , 0.25𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 ) = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(1022875 + 0, 0.25 × 41.4 × 203 × 1497)

= 1022875𝑁 = 1022.9𝑘𝑁
LRFD eq 5.8.3.3-1 and 2
Calculate demand over capacity ratio based on provided vertical rebar:
𝑫 |𝑉𝑢 − 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | |−507.9 − 0.90 × (−117.1)|

= = = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟑𝟕
𝑪 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑛 0.90 × 1022.9
O.K.
Determine if minimum rebar is required and compare the provided plus extra required
transverse rebar against the minimum:
|𝑉𝑢 − 0.5𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | > 0.5 × 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑐 => |−507.9 − 0.5 × 0.90 × (−117.1)| = 455.2
< 0.5 × 0.90 × 1022.9 = 460.3
≫ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.4-1
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝐴𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 𝑚𝑚2

= max ( , − ) = (0, 0.2622 − 0) = 0
𝑠 𝑠 𝑠 𝑠 𝑚𝑚
Longitudinal Reinforcement for Positive Flexure
The demands that control longitudinal rebar for positive flexure are:

Mu=3111.3 kNm
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=0.0 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
The calculation for extra required transverse rebar was repeated for the demands that
control longitudinal rebar for positive flexure. The Vs based on provided plus extra
required transverse rebar for that combination is:
𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 + 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎
𝑉𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = (2.765𝐸 + 04 + 0) × 413.7 × 1497 × cot 6.30°
𝑠
= 0𝑁 = 0𝑘𝑁
113
Calculate area of required longitudinal rebar on flexural tension side for positive bending.
Limit Vs to Vu/ φv. From flexural capacity calculations the average stress in prestressing
steel at nominal bending resistance for positive bending is fps=926.3MPa.
|𝑀𝑢 | 𝑁𝑢 𝑉𝑢 |𝑉𝑢 | 1
𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 = ( + 0.5 + (| − 𝑉𝑝 | − 0.5 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (𝑉𝑠 , )) cot 𝜃 −𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 )
𝑑𝑣 𝜑𝑓 𝜑𝑐 𝜑𝑣 𝜑𝑣 𝑓𝑦
|3111 × 1𝐸6| 0 −507853 |−507853|

=( + 0.5 × + (| − 0| − 0.5 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (0, )) cot 6.30° −10398
1497 × 0.90 1.00 0.90 0.90
1
× 926.3) < 0 ≫ 𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑡ℎ𝑒
413.7
𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 = 0𝑚𝑚2
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.5-1
Compare against provided longitudinal rebar and calculate required extra longitudinal
rebar area for positive flexure.
𝐴𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 = 𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 − 𝐴𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 = 0 − 0 < 0

≫ 𝑛𝑜 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟
𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 = 0𝑚𝑚2
Longitudinal Reinforcement for Negative Flexure
The demands that control longitudinal rebar for negative flexure are:

Mu=3111.3 kNm
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=0.0 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
Since there is no negative moment demands no longitudinal reinforcement on the tension

side for negative flexure is required.
Summary
ConcRatio=0.14 per LRFD eq 5.8.3.3-2 O.K.
D/C=0.44 based on provided vertical rebar; LRFD eq.5.8.3.3-1 O.K.
Avextra=0 mm2/mm area of required extra transverse rebar per unit length to satisfy
D/C=1.0 and minimum per LRFD eq 5.8.2.5-1
Asextrapos=0 mm2 area of required extra longitudinal reinforcement on the positive

moment flexural tension side due to shear per LRFD eq 5.8.2.5-1
114
Asextraneg=0 mm2 area of required extra longitudinal reinforcement on the negative
6.7 Ultimate Shear Summary Tables
Concrete
Geometry h bw Bv f'c Fyv Fys Es sxe
Units mm^2 mm Mm Mm Mm Mm mm mm
Left Exterior 2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Girder 0
2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Interior girder 1
0
2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Interior girder 2
0
Right Exterior 2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Girder 0
Legend:
h - Depth of the girder.
bw - The girder gross web width.
bv - Effective girder web width per AASHTO section 5.8.2.9.
f'c - Strength of concrete.
fyv - Yield strength of transverse shear reinforcement.
fys - Yield strength of longitudinal shear reinforcement.
Es - Modulus of elasticity of reinforcement.
sxe - Crack spacing parameter per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-5.
Table 27-live load distribution Summary
115
Live Load Distribution
and Resistance
Factors LLDF V LLDF M DF Other Φv Φf φc
Units - - - - - -
Left Exterior Girder 0.857 0.857 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Interior girder 1 0.829 0.691 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Interior girder 2 0.829 0.691 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Right Exterior Girder 0.857 0.857 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Legend:
LLDF V - Live load distribution factor for shear.
LLDF M - Live load distribution factor for moment.
DF Other - Distribution factor applied to entire section Nu and Vp to obtain girder Nu and
Vp.
φv - Resistance factor for shear.
φf - Resistance factor for flexure.
φc - Resistance factor for compression.
Table 28-demand
Ctrl Ctrl
Dem Comb Ctrl Ctrl As As
Demands Set o Step D/C Av Pos Neg Vu Nu Mu Vp
Units - - - - - - - kN kN kNm kN
Left Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111. -117.1
Girder 3
Interior DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111. -117.1
girder 1 3
Interior DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111. -117.1
girder 2 3
Right DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111. -117.1
Exterior 3
Girder
Legend:
Dem Set - Name of demand set.
Combo - Name of Combination.
Step - Step Name.
Ctrl D/C - Does this combo control the shear demand over capacity ratio?
Ctrl Av - Does this combo control the extra required transverse reinforcement?
116
Ctrl As Pos - Does this combo control the extra required longitudinal reinforcement for
positive flexure?
Ctrl As Neg - Does this combo control the extra required longitudinal reinforcement for
negative flexure?
Vu - Shear demand.
Nu - Axial demand.
Mu - Moment demand.
Vp - Component in the direction of the applied shear of the effective prestressing force. If
same sign as Vu then the component is resisting the applied shear.
Table 29-concrete resistance
Con
Concrete De Co c Aps As
Resistan m mb Ste Rati Pro Pro
ce Set o p De Dv o v v fpo fps Ep Ec Ac εs β θ Vc
mm mm MP MP MP mm mm k
Units - - - Mm Mm - 2 2 a a a ^2 2 - - - N
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.1 103 0 723 906 206 304 360 - 6.3 27. 10
Left
t1 I1 7 4 98 .9 .1 842 41. 515 0.0 0 65 22
Exterior
.7 7 003 .9
Girder
854
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.1 103 0 723 926 206 304 360 - 6.3 27. 10
Interior t1 I1 7 4 98 .9 .3 842 41. 515 0.0 0 65 22
girder 1 .7 7 003 .9
854
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.1 103 0 723 926 206 304 360 - 6.3 27. 10
Interior t1 I1 7 4 98 .9 .3 842 41. 515 0.0 0 65 22
girder 2 .7 7 003 .9
854
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.1 103 0 723 906 206 304 360 - 6.3 27. 10
Right
t1 I1 7 4 98 .9 .1 842 41. 515 0.0 0 65 22
Exterior
.7 7 003 .9
Girder
854
Legend:
Step - Step Name.
de - Effective depth from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tensile force in
117
the tensile reinforcement per LRRFD 5.2.9.-2.
dv - Effective shear depth per LRFD 5.8.2.9.
Conc Ratio - Ratio of demand and maximum concrete shear resistance per LRFD 5.8.3.3-
2.
Aps Prov - Area of provided longitudinal prestressed tendons on the tension flexural side
of girder.
As Prov - Area of provided longitudinal reinforcement on the tension flexural side of
girder.
fpo - A parameter taken as modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons multiplied by the
locked-in difference in strain between the prestressing tendons and the surrounding
concrete. Calculated as 0.7fpu per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-4.
fps - Average stress in prestressing steel per LRFD 5.7.3.1.1-1.
Ep - Average modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons on the tension flexural side of
girder.
Ec - Weighted average modulus of elasticity of concrete on the flexural tension side of
the member.
Ac - Area of concrete on the flexural tension side of the member per LRFD Figure
5.8.3.4.2-1.
εs - Strain in nonprestressed longitudinal tension reinforcement per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-4.
β - Factor indicating ability of diagonally cracked concrete to transmit tension and shear
per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-2.
θ - Angle of inclination of diagonal compressive stresses per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-3.
Vc - Nominal concrete shear resistance per LRFD 5.8.6.5-4.
Table 30-section resistance
Section Dem Comb Av/s Av/s Av/s AsPos AsNeg

Resistance Set o Step Prov Min Vs Vr D/C Flag Extra Extra Extra
mm2/ mm2/ mm2/
Units - - - mm mm kN kN - - mm mm2 mm2
Left Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min 0 0 0.0 920.6 0.44 0 0 0 0
Girder
Interior DSet1 Str-I1 Min 0 0 0.0 920.6 0.44 0 0 0 0
girder 1
girder 2
Right Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min 0 0 0.0 920.6 0.44 0 0 0 0
Girder
118
Legend:
Step - Step Name.
Av/s Prov - Provided average area of transverse shear reinforcement per unit length
within distance 0.5*dv*cot(theta) measured downstation from section cut and upstation
from section cut.
Av/s Min - Minimum area of transverse shear reinforcement per unit length per LRFD
5.8.2.5-1.
Vs - Nominal transverse reinforcement shear resistance per LRFD eq. 5.8.6.5-5.
Vr - Factored shear resistance excluding Vp contribution per LRFD 5.8.3.3-1.
D/C - Demand over capacity ratio - includes Vp contribution.
Flag - Section pass flag {Section passes=0; Concrete Web Area Insufficient=1; Minimum
Transverse Rebar Not Provided = 2; Transverse Rebar Not Sufficient to Cover
Demand=3; Longitudinal Rebar Insufficient to Cover Demand = 4}
Av/s Extra - 'Area of extra transverse rebar per unit length required in web to satisfy code
minimum reinforcement LRFD clause 5.8.2.4 and demands.
AsPos Extra - Area of extra longitudinal rebar required on tension side for positive
flexure to satisfy demand.
AsNeg Extra - Area of extra longitudinal rebar required on tension side for negative
Figure 52-maximum shear diagram interior girder
119
6.8 Ultimate Flexure Demands for exterior girder
factors).
Table 31 -User Defined Combinations
Name Type Action
Composite
Composite
Str-I2 prestress Prestress Non-moving Long-Term 1
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
120
Composite
Composite
Composite
DFmi=0.691.
Table 32-Defined=0.691 Combinations
Combination Load Case Name Group Scale Factor

DFme=0.857.
Table 33-Defined=0.857
Combination Load Case Name Group Scale Factor

121
Table 34-Summary of Moment Demands
Location Combination Combination Moment Mu Max Moment Mu Min

Max Min
Left Exterior Str-I1 Virtual Str-I2 Virtual 3564kN-m 2975kN-m
Girder
Right Exterior Str-I1 Virtual Str-I2 Virtual 3564kN-m 2975kN-m
Girder
6.8 Ultimate Flexure Resistance for exterior girder
Flexural Capacity Left Exterior Girder
Figure 53-flexural capacity left exterior girder
Girder Capacity in Positive Flexure per AASHTO LRFD 2012 with 2013 Interim
Revisions
ϕ = 0.9 h = 2.079 m = 2079 mm
bslab = 2.060 m = 2060 mm hslab = 0.250 m = 250 mm
122
btop = 1.067 m = 1067 mm hftop = 0.160 m = 160 mm
bbot = 0.294 m = 294 mm hfbot = 0.711 m = 711 mm
bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm dp pos = 1.568 m = 1568 mm
Aps pos = 10398 mm^2 ds pos = 0.000 m = 0 mm
As pos = 0 mm^2 f'cslab = 27.6 MPa
f'beam = 41.4 MPa fpu = 1034.2 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa
Prestressing factor
𝑓𝑝𝑦 827
𝑘 = 2 (1.04 − 𝑓 ) = 2 (1.04 − 1034) = 0.480
𝑝𝑢
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2
Concrete stress block factor

0.05 0.05
𝛽1 = 0.85 − (𝑓 ′ 𝑐 − 28.0) × = 0.85 − (27.6 − 28.0) × = 0.85 LRFD sec.
7 7
6.7.2.2

compressive face
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑢 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 10398 × 1034 + 0 × 413.7
𝑐= 𝑓𝑝𝑢
= 1034
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽1 𝑏 + 𝑘𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.85 × 27.6 × 0.85 × 2060 + 0.480 × 10398 × 1568
𝑑𝑝
= 243 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.1.1-4
- interpolate the compression controlled mild steel strain limit εcl:

0.004 − 0.002 0.004 − 0.002
𝜀𝑐𝑙 = 0.002 + (𝑓𝑦 − 413.9) = 0.002 + (413.7 − 413.9)
690.0 − 413.9 690.0 − 413.9
= 0.002
LRFD 5.7.2.1

𝑐 243 0.003 0.003
= = 𝐼𝑛𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑦 > 0.003+𝜀 = 0.003+0.002 = 0.60 N.G.
𝑑𝑠 0 𝑐𝑙
stress fs used in the moment resistance equation has been scaled down to 413.7MPa. Note
123
that the LRFD code recommends instead using strain compatibility to determine stress in
the mild steelreinforcement.
Warning
- verify assumption for rectangular section behavior 0 < 𝑎 ≤ ℎ𝑓 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1
𝑎 = 𝑐 × 𝛽1 = 243 × 0.85 = 206𝑚𝑚 ≤ ℎ𝑓 = 250𝑚𝑚 O.K.

𝑐 243
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 𝑓𝑝𝑢 (1 − 𝑘 𝑑 ) = 1034.2 × (1 − 0.480 × 1568) = 957.4 𝑀𝑃𝑎 LRFD
𝑝
eq. 5.7.3.1.1.-1
Flexural resistance
𝑐𝛽1 𝑐𝛽1
𝑀𝑟 = 𝜑 (𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 (𝑑𝑝 − ) + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 (𝑑𝑠 − )) =
2 2
243×0.85 243×0.85
0.9 × (10398 × 957.4 × (1568 − ) + 0 × 413.7 × (0 − )) =
2 2
13122938836 𝑁𝑚𝑚 = 13123 𝑘𝑁𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.7.3.2.2-1
Left Exterior Girder Demand over Capacity Ratio for Positive Flexure
𝑫 𝑀𝑢 3564
= = 13123 = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟕𝟐O.K
𝑪 𝑀𝑟
Girder Capacity in Negative Flexure
ϕ = 0.9 bbot = 0.711 m = 711 mm

hfbot = 0.294 m = 294 mm bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm
dp neg = 0.000 m = 0 mm Aps neg = 0 mm^2
ds neg = 0.000 m = 0 mm As neg = 0 mm^2
f'cbeam = 41.4 MPa fpu = 0.0 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa
No PT and no reinforcement provided on flexural tension side => flexural capacity not
calculated.
124
6.10 Ultimate Flexure Summary Tables for exterior girder
h
Concrete b h bf hf bf hf Girde CG CG f'c f'c
Geometry Slab Slab Top Top bw Bot Bot r Top Bot Slab Beam
Units mm mm mm mm mm mm Mm Mm Mm mm MPa MPa
Left Exterior 2060 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 768 1311 27.6 41.4
Girder
Interior 2500 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 721 1358 27.6 41.4
girder 1
Interior 2500 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 721 1358 27.6 41.4
girder 2
Right 2060 250 1067 160 203 711 294 2079 768 1311 27.6 41.4
Exterior
Girder
Legend:
b Slab - Tributary width of the composite slab.
h Slab - Equivalent thickness of the composite slab.
bf Top - Precast beam top flange width.
hf Top - Precast beam top flange thickness.
bw - Precast beam web width.
bf Bot - Precast beam bottom flange width.
hf Bot - Precast beam bottom flange thickness.
h Girder - Depth of the girder (beam plus slab).
CG Top - Distance from centroid of composite section to the topmost point of the bridge
section.
CG Bot - Distance from centroid of composite section to the bottommost point of the
bridge section.
f'c Slab - Composite slab concrete strength.
f'c Beam - Precast beam concrete strength.
125
Table 36-PT and rebar
PT and Aps Aps dp dp As As ds ds fpu fpu fs fs k

Rebar Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Fys Neg Pos Neg k Pos
mm^ mm^ mm^ mm^
Units 2 2 mm mm 2 2 mm mm MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa - -
Left 0 1039 0 1568 0 0 0 0 0.0 1034 413. 413. 413. 0.00 0.48
Exterior 8 .2 7 7 7 0 0
Girder
Interior 0 1039 0 1568 0 0 0 0 0.0 1034 413. 413. 413. 0.00 0.48
girder 1 8 .2 7 7 7 0 0
Interior 0 1039 0 1568 0 0 0 0 0.0 1034 413. 413. 413. 0.00 0.48
girder 2 8 .2 7 7 7 0 0
Right 0 1039 0 1568 0 0 0 0 0.0 1034 413. 413. 413. 0.00 0.48
Exterior 8 .2 7 7 7 0 0
Girder
Legend:
Aps Neg - Area of top prestress tendons.
Aps Pos - Area of bottom prestress tendons.
dp Neg - Distance from the bottom fiber to the centroid of those tendons that are located
dp Pos - Distance from the top fiber to the centroid of those tendons that are located
below the top compression zone.
As Neg - Area of top reinforcement.
As Pos - Area of bottom reinforcement.
ds Neg - Distance from the bottom fiber to the centroid of those rebars that are located
ds Pos - Distance from the top fiber to the centroid of those rebars that are located below
the top compression zone.
fpu Neg - Specified tensile strength of top prestress tendons (weighted average).
fpu Pos - Specified tensile strength of bottom prestress tendons (weighted average).
fys - Yield strength of longitudinal rebar.
fs Neg - Stress in longitudinal rebar located in tensile zone for negative moment.
fs Pos - Stress in longitudinal rebar located in tensile zone for positive moment.
k Neg - Factor k per eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2 top.
k Pos - Factor k per eq. 5.7.3.1.1-2 bottom.
126
Table 37-compression block
Compression TSect TSect Beta1 Beta1 a Loc a Loc fps fps

Block Pos Neg Pos Neg c Pos c Neg a Pos a Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg
Units - - - - mm mm Mm Mm - - MPa MPa
No No 0.85 0.75 243 0 206 0 In top In 957.4 0.0
slab beam
Left Exterior
botto
Girder
m
flange
No No 0.85 0.75 202 0 172 0 In top In 970.1 0.0
slab beam
Interior
botto
girder 1
m
flange
No No 0.85 0.75 202 0 172 0 In top In 970.1 0.0
slab beam
Interior
botto
girder 2
m
flange
No No 0.85 0.75 243 0 206 0 In top In 957.4 0.0
slab beam
Right Exterior
botto
Girder
m
flange
Legend:
TSect Pos - Is section T section for positive moment?
TSect Neg - Is section T section for negative moment?
Beta1 Pos - Stress block factor per 5.7.2.2 for positive moment.
Beta1 Neg - Stress block factor per 5.7.2.2 for negative moment.
c Pos - Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis for positive
moment.
c Neg - Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis for negative
moment.
a Pos - Depth of the equivalent compression stress block for positive moment.
a Neg - Depth of the equivalent compression stress block for negative moment.
a Loc Pos - Extend of equivalent compression stress block for positive moment
a Loc Neg - Extend of equivalent compression stress block for positive moment
fps Pos - Average stress in the prestressing steel at nominal bending resistance for
positive moment (eq. 5.7.3.1.1-1).
127
fps Neg - Average stress in the prestressing steel at nominal bending resistance for
negative moment (eq. 5.7.3.1.1-1).
Table 38-moment resistance
Dem
Moment LLDF Combo Dem Mu Combo Set
Resistance Mom φ Mr Pos Mu Pos Pos Set Pos Mr Neg Neg Neg Neg
Units - - KNm KNm - - KNm KNm - -
Left Exterior 0.857 0.90 13122. 3564.2 Str-I1 DSet2 0.0 2975.0 Str-I2 DSet1
Girder 9
0.691 0.90 13451. 3564.2 Str-I1 DSet2 0.0 2975.0 Str-I2 DSet2
Interior girder 1
2
0.691 0.90 13451. 3564.2 Str-I1 DSet2 0.0 2975.0 Str-I2 DSet1
Interior girder 2
2
Right Exterior 0.857 0.90 13122. 3564.2 Str-I1 DSet2 0.0 2975.0 Str-I2 DSet2
Girder 9
Legend:
LLDF Mom - Live load distribution factor for moment.
φ - Resistance factor.
Mr Pos - Factored resistance for positive bending.
Mu Pos - Controlling positive bending demand moment.
Combo Pos - Name of combination that controls positive moment demand.
Dem Set Pos - Name of demand set that controls positive moment demand.
Mr Neg - Factored resistance for negative bending.
Mu Neg - Controlling negative bending demand moment.
Combo Neg - Name of combination that controls negative moment demand.
Dem Set Neg - Name of demand set that controls negative moment demand.
6.11 Ultimate Shear Demands for exterior girder
128
factors).
Table 39-User Defined Combinations
Name Type Action
Str-I1 DEAD Dead Non-moving Non-Composite 1.25
Composite
Composite
Str-I2 DEAD Dead Non-moving Non-Composite 0.9
Composite
Composite
DFmi=0.691.
Table 40-User Defined 0.691

Name
129
DFme=0.857.
Table 6.30 User Defined 0.857

Name
Virtual Combinations for Shear at Internal Girder. The scale factor of non-moving load
DFvi=0.829.

Name
DEAD Non-moving 0.3125
Str-I1 Virtual
130
Virtual Combinations for Shear at External Girder. The scale factor of non-moving load
DFve=0.857.

Name
Table 43-Summary of Demands Controlling Shear D/C
Location Combination and Moment Mu Shear Vu Shear Vp

Step
Left Exterior Str-I1 Virtual 3111kN-m -508kN 0kN

Girder Min

Min

Min
Right Exterior Str-I1 Virtual 3111kN-m -508kN 0kN

Girder Min
Table Notes:
1. The above table summarizes demands that control the shear demand over
capacity ratio.
131
2. The shear Vp is component in the direction of the applied shear of the
effective prestressing force. Vp that has the same sign as Vu indicates that
the prestressing component is resisting the applied shear. When LLD
factors are used the Vp component from entire section cut is uniformly
distributed to all girders.
3. The Step indicates the extremes (max or min) for each force type that were
used in the calculation of the resistance.
4. The label -CodeMinMuPos or -CodeMinMuNeg that may appear in

column Step indicates that the moment component was controlled by
|𝑀𝑢 | > |𝑉𝑢 − 𝑉𝑝 |𝑑𝑣 as required by AASHTO LRFD Section 5.8.3.4.2-4.
6.12 Ultimate Shear Resistance for exterior girder
Shear Capacity Left Exterior Girder
Table 44-shear capacity
ϕf = 0.90 ϕv = 0.90
ϕc = 1.00 f'c = 41.4 MPa
132
Ec = 30441.7 MPa fpu = 1034.2 MPa
fy = 413.7 MPa Es = 199948 MPa
h = 2.079 m = 2079 mm bw = 0.203 m = 203 mm
bv = 0.203 m = 203 mm Act = 360515 mm^2
dp = 0.889 m = 889 mm Aps = 10398 mm^2
ds = 0.000 m = 0 mm As = 0 mm^2
D/C Ratio and Transverse Reinforcement
The demands that control the D/C ratio and transverse reinforcement are:

Mu=3111.3 kNm
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=-117.1 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
Calculate effective shear depth:
From flexural capacity calculations the depth of the equivalent compression block for
positive bending is a=195 mm.
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 𝑑𝑝 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑠 10398 × 906.1 × 889 + 0 × 413.7 × 0
𝑑𝑒 = = = 889 𝑚𝑚
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 + 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 10398 × 906.1 + 0 × 413.7
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.9-2
𝑑𝑣 = max(0.9𝑑𝑒 , 0.72ℎ, 𝑑𝑒 − 0.5𝑎)

= max(0.9 × 889, 0.72 × 2079, 889 − 0.5 × 195) = 1497 𝑚𝑚
Verify if concrete in the web will not crush prior to yield of the transverse reinforcement:
|𝑉𝑢 − 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | |−507852.7 − 0.90 × (−117066.6)|

𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = = = 0.14
𝜑𝑣 (0.25𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 ) 0.90 × (0.25 × 41.4 × 203 × 1497)
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.3-2

O.K.
Verify if minimum transverse reinforcement is provided:
Average area of provided shear reinforcement per unit length within distance
0.5𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = 0.5 × 1497 × cot(27.65𝑑𝑒𝑔) = 1428 𝑚𝑚 measured upstation and
downstation from section cut is Avprov=0 mm2/mm.
133
𝐴𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑣 203 𝑚𝑚2 𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 𝑚𝑚2
√
= 0.083 𝑓′𝑐 = 0.083√41.4 = 0.2622 > =0
𝑠 𝑓𝑦 413.7 𝑚𝑚 𝑠 𝑚𝑚
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.5-1
Section does not contain at least minimum amount of shear reinforcement.
Calculate net longitudinal tensile strain at the centroid of the tension reinforcement:
|𝑀𝑢 |
+ 0.5𝑁𝑢 + |𝑉𝑢 − 𝑉𝑝 | − 𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.7𝑓𝑝𝑢
𝑑𝑣
𝐸𝑠 𝐴𝑠 + 𝐸𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠
|3111.3×106 |
+ 0.5 × (0) + |−507853 − (−117067)| − 10398 × 0.7 × 1034.2
1497
= =0
199948 × 0 + 206842.7 × 10398
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
Since εsinit<0 replace denominator with 𝐸𝑠 𝐴𝑠 + 𝐸𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠 + 𝐸𝑐 𝐴𝑐𝑡

|𝑀𝑢 |
+ 0.5𝑁𝑢 + |𝑉𝑢 − 𝑉𝑝 | − 𝐴𝑝𝑠 0.7𝑓𝑝𝑢
𝑑𝑣
𝐸𝑠 𝐴𝑠 + 𝐸𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠 + 𝐸𝑐 𝐴𝑐𝑡
|3111.3×106 |
+ 0.5 × (0) + |−507853 − (−117067)| − 10398 × 0.7 × 1034.2
1497
=
199948 × 0 + 206842.7 × 10398 + 360515 × 30441.7
= −0.00038535
Verify if axial tension is large enough to crack the section:

𝑁𝑢 0
= = 0.0 𝑀𝑃𝑎 ≤ 0.52√𝑓′𝑐 = 0.52 × √41.4
𝐴𝑐 1372320
= 3.3 𝑀𝑃𝑎 => 𝑛𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
Verify limits on strain εsinit:
-0.0004 ≤ εsinit≤ 0.006 => εs=3.0442E+07
Calculate Parameters β and θ:
Calculate the crack spacing parameter:

35 35
𝑠𝑥𝑒 = 𝑠𝑥 = 200 × = 152𝑚𝑚
𝑎𝑥 + 16 30 + 16
LRFD eq 5.8.3.4.2-5
Verify limits on sxe:
305mm ≤ sxe≤ 2030mm => sxe=305mm
134
Since section does not contain at least the minimum amount of shear reinforcement, the
value of β is calculated as:
4.8 51𝑥25.4 4.8 51𝑥25.4
𝛽= = × = 6.30
1 + 750𝜀𝑠 39𝑥25.4 + 𝑠𝑥𝑒 1 + 750 × 3.0442𝐸 + 07 39𝑥25.4 + 305
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-2
𝜃 = 29 + 3500𝜀𝑠 = 29 + 3500 × 3.0442𝐸 + 07 = 27.65𝑑𝑒𝑔

LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-3
Calculate shear resistance of concrete:
𝑉𝑐 = 0.083𝛽 √𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 = 0.083 × 6.30 × √41.4 × 203 × 1497 = 1022875𝑁

= 1022.9𝑘𝑁
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.4.2-1
Calculate shear resistance of provided vertical reinforcement:

𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣
𝑉𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = 0 × 413.7 × 1497 × cot 27.65° = 0𝑁 = 0.0𝑘𝑁
𝑠
LRFD eq C5.8.3.3-1
Determine nominal shear resistance of the section:
𝑉𝑛 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(𝑉𝑐 + 𝑉𝑠 , 0.25𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑣 𝑑𝑣 ) = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(1022875 + 0, 0.25 × 41.4 × 203 × 1497)

= 1022875𝑁 = 1022.9𝑘𝑁
LRFD eq 5.8.3.3-1 and 2
Calculate demand over capacity ratio based on provided vertical rebar:
𝑫 |𝑉𝑢 − 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | |−507.9 − 0.90 × (−117.1)|

= = = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟑𝟕
𝑪 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑛 0.90 × 1022.9
O.K.
Determine if minimum rebar is required and compare the provided plus extra required
transverse rebar against the minimum:
|𝑉𝑢 − 0.5𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑝 | > 0.5 × 𝜑𝑣 𝑉𝑐 => |−507.9 − 0.5 × 0.90 × (−117.1)| = 455.2
< 0.5 × 0.90 × 1022.9 = 460.3
≫ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑
LRFD eq. 5.8.2.4-1
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝐴𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 𝑚𝑚2

= max ( , − )= (0, 0.2622 − 0) = 0
𝑠 𝑠 𝑠 𝑠 𝑚𝑚
135
Longitudinal Reinforcement for Positive Flexure
The demands that control longitudinal rebar for positive flexure are:

Mu=3111.3 kNm
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=0.0 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
The calculation for extra required transverse rebar was repeated for the demands that
control longitudinal rebar for positive flexure. The Vs based on provided plus extra
required transverse rebar for that combination is:
𝐴𝑣𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 + 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎
𝑉𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 𝑑𝑣 cot 𝜃 = (2.765𝐸 + 04 + 0) × 413.7 × 1497 × cot 6.30°
𝑠
= 0𝑁 = 0𝑘𝑁
Calculate area of required longitudinal rebar on flexural tension side for positive bending.
Limit Vs to Vu/ φv. From flexural capacity calculations the average stress in prestressing
steel at nominal bending resistance for positive bending is fps=906.1MPa.
|𝑀𝑢 | 𝑁𝑢 𝑉𝑢 |𝑉𝑢 | 1
𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 = ( + 0.5 + (| − 𝑉𝑝 | − 0.5 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (𝑉𝑠 , )) cot 𝜃 −𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 )
𝑑𝑣 𝜑𝑓 𝜑𝑐 𝜑𝑣 𝜑𝑣 𝑓𝑦
|3111 × 1𝐸6| 0 −507853 |−507853|

=( + 0.5 × + (| − 0| − 0.5 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (0, )) cot 6.30° −10398
1497 × 0.90 1.00 0.90 0.90
1
× 906.1) <0
413.7
≫ 𝑛𝑜 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 = 0𝑚𝑚2
LRFD eq. 5.8.3.5-1
Compare against provided longitudinal rebar and calculate required extra longitudinal
rebar area for positive flexure.
𝐴𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 = 𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 − 𝐴𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣 = 0 − 0 < 0

≫ 𝑛𝑜 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟
𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 = 0𝑚𝑚2
Longitudinal Reinforcement for Negative Flexure
The demands that control longitudinal rebar for negative flexure are:
136
Mu=3111.3 kNm
Vu=-507.9 kN
Vp=0.0 kN
Nu=0.0 kN
Since there is no negative moment demands no longitudinal reinforcement on the tension

side for negative flexure is required.
Summary
ConcRatio=0.14 per LRFD eq 5.8.3.3-2 O.K.
D/C=0.44 based on provided vertical rebar; LRFD eq.5.8.3.3-1 O.K.
Avextra=0 mm2/mm area of required extra transverse rebar per unit length to satisfy
D/C=1.0 and minimum per LRFD eq 5.8.2.5-1
Asextrapos=0 mm2 area of required extra longitudinal reinforcement on the positive

Asextraneg=0 mm2 area of required extra longitudinal reinforcement on the negative

6.13 Ultimate Shear Summary Tables for exterior girder
Concrete
Geometry H Bw bv f'c Fyv fys Es sxe
Units mm^2 Mm mm Mm Mm mm mm mm
2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Left Exterior Girder
0
2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Interior girder 1
0
2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Interior girder 2
0
Right Exterior 2079 203 203 41.4 413.7 413.7 199948. 305
Girder 0
Legend:
h - Depth of the girder.
bw - The girder gross web width.
bv - Effective girder web width per AASHTO section 5.8.2.9.
137
f'c - Strength of concrete.
fyv - Yield strength of transverse shear reinforcement.
fys - Yield strength of longitudinal shear reinforcement.
Es - Modulus of elasticity of reinforcement.
sxe - Crack spacing parameter per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-5.
Table 46-live load distribution
Live Load Distribution

and Resistance Factors LLDF V LLDF M DF Other φv φf φc
Units - - - - - -
Left Exterior Girder 0.857 0.857 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Interior girder 1 0.829 0.691 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Interior girder 2 0.829 0.691 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Right Exterior Girder 0.857 0.857 0.250 0.90 0.90 1.00
Legend:
LLDF V - Live load distribution factor for shear.
LLDF M - Live load distribution factor for moment.
DF Other - Distribution factor applied to entire section Nu and Vp to obtain girder Nu and
Vp.
φv - Resistance factor for shear.
φf - Resistance factor for flexure.
φc - Resistance factor for compression.
Table 47-demands
Dem Comb Ctrl Ctrl As Ctrl As

Demands Set o Step D/C Ctrl Av Pos Neg Vu Nu Mu Vp
Units - - - - - - - kN kN kNm kN
Left Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111.3 -117.1
Girder
Interior girder DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111.3 -117.1
1
Interior girder DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111.3 -117.1
2
Right Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min Yes Yes Yes Yes -507.9 0.0 3111.3 -117.1
Girder
Legend:
138
Step - Step Name.
Ctrl D/C - Does this combo control the shear demand over capacity ratio?
Ctrl Av - Does this combo control the extra required transverse reinforcement?
Ctrl As Pos - Does this combo control the extra required longitudinal reinforcement for
positive flexure?
Ctrl As Neg - Does this combo control the extra required longitudinal reinforcement for
negative flexure?
Vu - Shear demand.
Nu - Axial demand.
Mu - Moment demand.
Vp - Component in the direction of the applied shear of the effective prestressing force. If
same sign as Vu then the component is resisting the applied shear.
Table 48-concrete resistance
Con
Concrete De c
Resistanc m Com Rati Aps As
e Set bo Step De dv o Prov Prov fpo fps Ep Ec Ac εs β θ Vc
mm mm mm mm
Units - - - Mm mm - 2 2 MPa MPa MPa ^2 2 - - - kN
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.14 103 0 723. 906. 206 304 360 - 6.30 27.6 102
Left
t1 I1 7 98 9 1 842. 41.7 515 0.00 5 2.9
Exterior
7 038
Girder
54
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.14 103 0 723. 926. 206 304 360 - 6.30 27.6 102
Interior t1 I1 7 98 9 3 842. 41.7 515 0.00 5 2.9
girder 1 7 038
54
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.14 103 0 723. 926. 206 304 360 - 6.30 27.6 102
Interior t1 I1 7 98 9 3 842. 41.7 515 0.00 5 2.9
girder 2 7 038
54
DSe Str- Min 889 149 0.14 103 0 723. 906. 206 304 360 - 6.30 27.6 102
Right
t1 I1 7 98 9 1 842. 41.7 515 0.00 5 2.9
Exterior
7 038
Girder
54
Legend:

Step - Step Name.
139
de - Effective depth from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tensile force in
the tensile reinforcement per LRRFD 5.2.9.-2.
dv - Effective shear depth per LRFD 5.8.2.9.
Conc Ratio - Ratio of demand and maximum concrete shear resistance per
LRFD 5.8.3.32.
Aps Prov - Area of provided longitudinal prestressed tendons on the tension flexural side
of girder.
As Prov - Area of provided longitudinal reinforcement on the tension flexural side of
girder.
fpo - A parameter taken as modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons multiplied by the
locked-in difference in strain between the prestressing tendons and the surrounding
concrete. Calculated as 0.7fpu per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-4.
fps - Average stress in prestressing steel per LRFD 5.7.3.1.1-1.
Ep - Average modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons on the tension flexural side of
girder.
Ec - Weighted average modulus of elasticity of concrete on the flexural tension side of
the member.
Ac - Area of concrete on the flexural tension side of the member per LRFD Figure
5.8.3.4.2-1.
εs - Strain in nonprestressed longitudinal tension reinforcement per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-4.
β - Factor indicating ability of diagonally cracked concrete to transmit tension and shear
per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-2.
θ - Angle of inclination of diagonal compressive stresses per LRFD 5.8.3.4.2-3.
Vc - Nominal concrete shear resistance per LRFD 5.8.6.5-4.
Table 49-section resistance
Section Dem Comb Av/s Av/s Av/s AsPos AsNeg

Resistance Set o Step Prov Min Vs Vr D/C Flag Extra Extra Extra
mm2/ mm2/ mm2/
Units - - - mm mm kN kN - - mm mm2 mm2
Left Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min 0 0 0.0 920.6 0.44 0 0 0 0
Girder
girder 1
girder 2
Right Exterior DSet1 Str-I1 Min 0 0 0.0 920.6 0.44 0 0 0 0
Girder
140
Legend:
Step - Step Name.
Av/s Prov - Provided average area of transverse shear reinforcement per unit length
within distance 0.5*dv*cot(theta) measured downstation from section cut and upstation
from section cut.
Av/s Min - Minimum area of transverse shear reinforcement per unit length per LRFD
5.8.2.5-1.
Vs - Nominal transverse reinforcement shear resistance per LRFD eq. 5.8.6.5-5.
Vr - Factored shear resistance excluding Vp contribution per LRFD 5.8.3.3-1.
D/C - Demand over capacity ratio - includes Vp contribution.
Flag - Section pass flag {Section passes=0; Concrete Web Area Insufficient=1; Minimum
Transverse Rebar Not Provided = 2; Transverse Rebar Not Sufficient to Cover
Demand=3; Longitudinal Rebar Insufficient to Cover Demand = 4}
Av/s Extra - 'Area of extra transverse rebar per unit length required in web to satisfy code
minimum reinforcement LRFD clause 5.8.2.4 and demands.
AsPos Extra - Area of extra longitudinal rebar required on tension side for positive
AsNeg Extra - Area of extra longitudinal rebar required on tension side for negative
141
Figure 54 -3D modal
142
CHAPTER7
CONCLUSION
By comparing the rcc bridge with the IRC and AASHTO code we get by doing the IRC
that there is the less usage of steel, also the material usage is less. By the IRC method we
get the geometry of girder economical, also there is usage of only 3 longitudinal girders
but in AASHTO we had used 4 girders that was used in Afghanistan.In the IRC method
the bending moment and shear force is less as compared to the AASHTO method.
By the AASHTO method which was used in Afghanistan , was uneconomical, there is
more usage of steel, cement and all other usage materials. But in the IRC we get that the
bridge is better economical, durability is better, strength .
I have comapared the both methods by software, results was shown above in the
modelling chapter. I have applied the moving load, dead load and impact load and have
been represents a 3 D modelling of it. By comparing the values we are getting all the
parameters are approximately same. I have found that if the modeled which I had
prestressed by the CSI bridge software by using the code AASHTO LRFD for the long
span, is very economical. If I used this type of methodology software and code in
Afghanistan there would be a great advancement in the bridges
Of all above conclusion I summarized that we can make advancement in the bridges of
Afhanistan by applying either IRC for short span and for the long span AASHTO LRFD.
143
REFERENC
[1]. AASHTO LRFD (2000)

[2]. AASHTO. (2000). Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. American
Association of State Highway Officials, Washington .
[3]. ACI. ((2000)). RCC Bridge design .
[4]. Bergeron, J. a. (May 2002.). The incremental adaptation of the Clifford Hollow
Bridge. Structural Engineer .
[5]. Bracci, J. M. ( (1992)). Experimental and Analytical Study of Seismic Damage
and Retrofit of Lightly . Reinforced Concrete Structures in Low Siesmicity
ZonesBuffalo: State University of New York. , 41-62.
[6]. Durkee, J. ( Press, 2000.). Steel Bridge Construction. Bridge Engineering
Handbook, , pgs 45-58.
[7]. Friedland, I. M. (2006 Through 2009). Advances in Highway Bridge
Technologies for Design, Inspection and Management: FHWA’s Research and
Development Program . Bridge and Structures R&D, Federal Highway
AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation .
[8]. Fujikura, S. K. ( (2000)). Effect of the Interlocking Ties and Cross Ties on the
Dynamic Strength and . Ductility of Rectangular Reinforced Concrete Bridge
Columns. Journal of Structural Mechanics and Earthquake Engineering , 640 (I-
50), 71-88.
[9]. Gobarah, A. &. ((1988).). Seismic Performance of Highway Bridges. Structures
Engineering , 10 (3), 157-166.
[10]. IRC, 2. (2012). International Residential Code for One- and Two .
Effective Use of the International Residential Code .
[11]. LaViolette, M. M. (July 2006.). Modern Steel Construction, February
2004Lebet, J., “Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete V. Proceedings of
the 5th International Conference, .
[12]. Pavement structures (CBR). (n.d.).
[13]. Priestley, M. (2000). Direct displacement-based seismic design of concrete
buildings. Bull. NZSEE, (in press). , p171-182.
[14]. Reese, L. C. ( (1975).). “Lateral loading of deep foundations in stiff clay.
Journal of geotechnical engineering division , 633-649.
[15]. Rombach, G. A. ((2004):). Finite element design of concrete structures.
ThomasTelford, Cornwall .
[16]. Specifications, A. L. (2015 ). bookstore.transportation.or. Customary U.S.
Units, 7th Edition, with .
144
[17]. Sritharan, S. a. (2008). “An assessment of broad impact of seasonally
frozen soil on seismic response of bridges in the U.S. and Japan. Proceedings of
the 24th US-Japan bridge engineering workshop, Minneapolis. FHWA , 429-440.
[18]. Suleiman, M. T. ( (2006)). Cyclic lateral load response of bridge column-
foundation-soil systems in freezing conditions. Journal of structural engineering ,
132(11).
[19]. Victor D, J. a. (oct 1975). reaction in there girder bidge deck . journal of
indian road s congress vol , 299pp41.
[20]. Wotherspoon, L. M. ( (2010)). “Investigation on the impact of seasonally
frozen soil. on seismic response of bridge columns. , 15(5): 473-481.
145
146
147
148
149
150

Bridge Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bridge Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADVANCING OF REINFORCE CONCRETE BRIDGE DESIGN IN

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

I hereby declare that the work that is presented in this dissertation

Mr. Nishant Kumar Rajouria

A very special thanks to our HOD Satya Prakash, administraton of SHARDA

Ahmad Jawed Jahanmal

Figure 1-Slab bridge ............................................................................................................ 2

Table 1 -Mark Of Concrete ................................................................................................ 23

Followings are some of the most common Concrete bridges:

Precast Girder bridges.

Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges

Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges

Arch Concrete Bridge

Post-tension Pre stressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges (spans up to 300m).

Main parts of the slab bridge

Figure 2 - Main parts of the Slab Bridge

Types of slab bridges due to material

• Timber slab bridges

• Steel slab bridges

• Reinforcement concrete slab bridges

Figure 3 - T-Beam Bridge

Figure 4- T-Beam Bridge

•Inverted Tee (30 m)

•AASHTO Box (36 m)

•AASHTO I-Beam (45 m)

•New I-Beam shapes (65 m)

•Spliced New I-Beams (96 m)

Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges

Figure 5 - Composite Steel - Concrete Bridges

Composite Pre stressed - Concrete Bridges

Figure 7- Composite pre stressed - Concrete Bridges

The advent of modern concrete technology fostered a renaissance of arch bridge

Figure 8 - Arch Concrete Bridge

Figure 9- composite superstructure system

1.3 Research Scope

1.6 CONTENT OF DISSERTATION

The following are the various content of my desertation

CHAPTER 1. Introduction. Bridge, structure built over water or any obstacle or

Slab bridges,T- Beam Bridges,Precast Girder bridges..Composite Steel - Concrete

CHAPTER 4. Comparison: This chapter presents comparison of reinforce concrete

CHAPTER 6. prestress I- beam with composite slab: To capture the distribution of

2.2 Advancing the seismic design of reinforced concrete bridge columns

(Priestley, 2000)[13]The damage throughout many structures indicated that the

2.3 Advanced Bridge Analysis and Design Methods Simplified

The above three examples of recent software developments illustrate methods of

2.4 CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES USING INCREMENTAL LAUNCHIN

2.5 Development of Preliminary Load and Resistance Factor Design of Drilled

(Reese, (1975).)[14]The maximum qp of 60 ksf specified is based on the largest value

2.8 Structural analysis and design of concrete bridges

3.1 General types of bridge design codes

1- BS 5400 – united kingdom

2- Ontario Highway Bridge design code (OHBDC)

3- IRC (Indian Rout Congress)

4- ASSHTO American code .

5 – ACI (Amirecan concrete Institute)

3.2 Calculation of Loads

 Dead loads”The dead load on a superstructure is the weight of all superstructure

Figure 11 -Standard HS-Truck

Figure 12 - Standard H-Truck

I = 50/ 3.28L+125< 30%

3.3 Distribution of wheel load on slab